Archive for the ‘Uncategorized’ Category

Right Thing Smart Thing Sugar Daddy Edition

Posted: April 18, 2020 by datechguy in Uncategorized

Guy to woman at bar: Will you have sex with me for $1,000,000?

Woman: Well, [pauses] yeah, sure.

Guy: Will you have sex with me for $100?

Woman: [offended] What kind of girl do you think I am?

Guy: We’ve already established that, we’re just haggling over price now.

Very old joke unknown author

Two days ago Stacy McCain took down a post on the murder of Mackenzie Lueck due to objections by some of his kids to its tone.. In said post (which he stands behind despite taking it down) he objected to Ms. Lueck’s friend’s instance that we must to critique the choices that led to her murder and closes thus:

If grown-ups don’t warn girls against this stuff, peer pressure will continue leading many of them down the same road that led Mackenzie Lueck to her grave. Her anonymous friend can try to rationalize this “sugar baby” racket as something other than what it really is, and argue that “society” is wrong to condemn such behavior, but none of that can change the bottom line: “When they’re dead, they’re just hookers.”

The final line being from an episode of the Adult animated series Archer which by an odd coincidence I had just watched the day before.

Now while I see how that might offend some the point is very correct so let me put this into a context that might be readily understood and be less offensive to those of delicate sensibilities.

It is my understanding that young women have turned to “Sugar daddies” to pay for expensive colleges much like Miriam Weeks choose to become porn star Belle Knox porn star to help pay the tuition at Duke. That being the case let me ask this hypothetical question:

If a college operated a program where rich boosters could buy the, shall we say “companionship” of these young ladies (either for themselves or for student athletes as a perk for recruitment) how would feminists react?

Would they suggest that this is an excellent idea as these would be known men who would be less likely to present a physical danger and would not involve traveling and meeting people at 3 am somewhere? Or would they be shocked and angry at a college facilitating rich boosters using their wealth to obtain sex from young woman?

I submit and suggest that there is no moral difference between the pair. They’re both prostitution under a different name and the spiritual and psychological consequences are the same and I would highly advise any young woman considering such a path to reconsider. Once you start renting yourself out as a man’s sexual property you’ll find men will start treating you as property to be bought and sold. Much better to go to a less expensive school and own yourself completely instead of being the rental property of others.

After all is that really the “equality” you want for yourself?

The Democrats held up the Coronavirus stimulus so they could try and steal elections

Posted: April 16, 2020 by Jon Fournier in Uncategorized
Tags: , , ,

It is absolutely unconscionable that Speaker Nancy Pelosi held up the Coronavrius relief package for about a week in order to advance a progressive wish list.  The worst provisions of this progressive wish list were those that were supposed to federalized elections.  This would have guaranteed that Democrats would win the majority of all elections going forward, especially presidential elections.

The provisions imposing voting by mail and same day registration on all states would have opened US elections to an enormous amounts of fraud.  This is nothing compared to the amount of fraud that would have unleashed on US elections if the provision discussed in this Breitbart article Pelosi ‘Stimulus’ Bill Imposes Nationwide ‘Ballot Harvesting’ Without ‘Any Limit’ was imposed on all 50 states.

Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi’s new stimulus bill would mandate nationwide “ballot harvesting,” allowing party operatives to return other people’s ballots to polling places without “any limit” on the number of ballots.

“Ballot harvesting” was legalized in California in 2016, and first used in the 2018 midterm elections. It allows anyone to drop off someone else’s mail-in ballot at a polling station. There is no process for vetting or verifying those delivering the ballots — no background checks or identification requirements. Democrats dropped hundreds of thousands of ballots off at polling stations in 2018, helping Democrats as they flipped seven Republican seats.

Here is the actual text of the ballot harvesting provision.

shall permit a voter to designate any person to return a voted and sealed absentee ballot to the post office, a ballot drop-off location, tribally designated building, or election office so long as the person designated to return the ballot does not receive any form of compensation based on the number of ballots that the person has returned and no individual, group, or organization provides compensation on this basis; and (B) may not put any limit on how many voted and sealed absentee ballots any designated person can return to the post office, a ballot drop off location, tribally designated building, or election office.

When Nancy Pelosi attempted to insert the ballot harvesting provision into the bailout legislation she knew well that it will lead to Democrats stealing elections because it succeeded when it was tried in California.  This is documented in the Breitbart article Blue State Blues: Democrats Stole the Election in California — Legally, Through ‘Ballot Harvesting’

California Democrats “stole” the midterm election using a new method that is illegal elsewhere but completely legal in the Golden State: a practice called “ballot harvesting,” which allows third parties to submit mail-in ballots for voters.

The practice explains several mysteries about the 2018 election, such as: why mail-in ballots caused massive shifts toward Democrats in races Republicans thought they won on Election Night; why Republicans won the turnout battle in the primary, but lost it in the general election; and why Democrats with party backing defeated fellow Democrats without it — even when the latter had more money.

It is true that the proposed changes to election law could favor both parties however the Democrats have demonstrated a remarkable proclivity for cheating and fraud.  That is because they have embraced Marxist philosophies and Saul Allinsky’s Rule for Radicals. Their success is documented in this San Francisco Chronicle article

California Democrats took advantage of seemingly minor changes in a 2016 law to score their stunningly successful midterm election results, providing a target for GOP unhappiness that is tinged with a bit of admiration…Few people noticed when Gov. Jerry Brown signed the changes in AB1921 into law two years ago. In the past, California allowed only relatives or people living in the same household to drop off mail ballots for another voter. The new law allowed anyone, even a paid political campaign worker, to collect and return ballots — “harvesting” them, in political slang.

In Orange County alone, where every House seat went Democratic, “the number of Election Day vote-by-mail dropoffs was unprecedented — over 250,000,” Fred Whitaker, chairman of the county Republican Party, said in a note to supporters. “This is a direct result of ballot harvesting allowed under California law for the first time. That directly caused the switch from being ahead on election night to losing two weeks later.”

Mitch McConnell and the rest of the Senate Republicans must hold strong.  They must make sure the Democrats never take control of our electoral system.

AOC Biden, Reade the right thing and the smart thing

Posted: April 16, 2020 by datechguy in Uncategorized

As a general rule the right thing is the smart thing.

Peter Michael Dominic Ingemi

There aren’t a lot of things I like about AOC. I respect her campaign that took advantage of an incumbent who paid little or no attention to his district (which is a proper argument) and while she is generally wrong, in fact amazingly wrong about many things but she’s dead right about confronting the Joe Biden situation vis a vis Tara Reade.

The congresswoman didn’t miss a beat before responding, siding with the questioner entirely. She said that the issue is totally legitimate and needs to be confronted, rather than just “silencing” anyone who tries to bring it up. (CBS News)

And there’s real irony about AOC speaking out:

https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js

Not only is this the right and consistent thing (as opposed to the silence of CNN and the spin of the NYT ) but how many #metoo people follow Rose McGowan who have heard of this? How many leftist read the amazing times interview about their coverage, and do Democrats REALLY think that Donald Trump is going to remain silent about this during the debates? He’ll not only destroy Biden with it, but he’ll destroy the media for ignoring it and will DEFINITELY bring up the Kavanaugh double standard.

Much smarter to get this resolved before the convention fight that is going to take place over it or the debate debacle that will come after it or when Biden’s female VP is asked about it by Mike Pence (or did nobody think of that)?

Apparently AOC did and the fact that she is apparently smarter than the entire Democrat establishment says something about them, and nothing nice either.

Corona virus questions

Posted: April 14, 2020 by chrisharper in Uncategorized
Tags: ,

By Christopher Harper

Despite all of the information swirling around about Covid-19, I still have a bunch of unanswered questions.

Why were the models so wrong? 

In the space of about a week starting April 2, two revisions on April 5 and 8 have utterly discredited the model produced by the University of Washington’s Institute for Health Metrics and Evaluation. Just days ago, the estimates called for the likelihood of 100,000 deaths, with as many as 240,000 a real possibility. On April 8, the projected cumulative deaths were slashed to about 60,000, with the upper range again cut to about 126,000. In less than a week, the model proved to be off by more than 33 percent.

Remember when the Imperial College of London “experts” said there might be more than two million dead in the United States?

Why can’t news organizations do the simple math necessary to tell the true story of the virus?

The overall infection rate and death rate do not accurately show the nature of the pandemic. In order to compare apples to apples, you divide the number of those infected or dead by the total population of the country.

That shows that the United States is doing a good job when compared with other countries. But an accurate view of the pandemic wouldn’t fit the meme that Trump has been doing a bad job.

Why did New York City experience such a high rate of infection?

Other cities had high incidents of the disease but nothing to compare with New York. At first, it was thought that the virus had come from China. Now it appears that the virus affecting New York and New Jersey was a mutation from Europe. At first, it seemed that the outbreak had started in New Rochelle in the suburbs, but the minority and Hasidic Jewish communities were hard hit. It would be worthwhile to trace the path of the virus in the New York metropolitan area.

Why did Los Angeles have such a low rate of infection?

The rate was much lower than in many parts of the country. Perhaps the dependence on driving and a lack of a public transit system actually helps in a pandemic.

Why did the developing world have such a low rate of infection?

As one Australian newspaper put it: “How does a palm-fringed lagoon in Fiji or New Caledonia sound or perhaps a dive resort in Papua New Guinea, a beachfront hotel in East Timor? The more adventurous might like to try Latvia, Slovakia, Vietnam, or Kuwait. If there weren’t travel bans, of course.”

Why did Germany, which clamped down early, have such a low rate of infection like Sweden, which did virtually nothing? 

Other questions have obvious answers: stupidity.

Why does anyone think the data from China is accurate?

Why did some states close liquor stores?

Why was it all right to use Middle Eastern Respiratory Syndrome in 2012 while the Wuhan Virus was racist?

Older Entries
Newer Entries