nanana

Tops bottoms. Play 🤩

Not meant to be a rhetorical question, but what metrics do you think we could hold Trump accountable for, in terms of keeping his promises (whether you think they are hideous promises or not)? And then, also adding whether the promises are good? Here are some thoughts: 1) Trump has often said he's against war and nation-building and in favor of letting other countries be successful on their own without US money and firearms. Has he said this consistently enough (without at the same time saying the opposite of this) to consider it a "promise"? If so, was it a good promise that will move the country in a better direction? 2) Trump has been pretty clear about illegal immigration. Is this a campaign "promise" that can be measured? A good promise? 3) Trump has been pretty clear that military standards are very low and that improving performance is more important than female and trans participation in the military. Is this a "promise"? A good "promise"? 4) Trump has said he wants to cut spending. Is this a "promise"? A good "promise"? 5) Trump has said he's strongly in favor of free speech? "Promise"? "Good" promise? 6) Make America Healthy Again, promise? good? If not these, are there any other discernible "promises" he has made that can be used to determine success measures?

Sorry @BBBxCumDumpster I was a bit pompous, think your response is fair enough. I think I MAY be naive, but more folks on this site seem to be leftist, so it inflames my desire to push the ship toward middle and find common ground where we can. I spent much of my time on the left and thought the left was closer to justice, so when I began to see the justice in the positions of the right too, I just couldn't unsee it. I appreciate your point that there is mercenary treachery on both sides of the aisle. It's unfortunate that Biden left really no way out of the politicization of government since the only solution was to punish the folks that politicized government, which will have no credibility with the left, because they will - rightly or wrongly - see it as war. Are there any principles left to reclaim in the middle while still removing the corruption and criminalization of government? What neutral third party is in a position to do it? I'm not really following the eugenics garbage point, this feels like massive hyperbole. Can you give an example of what you're referring to? That whole autopen thing is crazy, especially when you realize that according to Jake Tapper, the White House was managing the whole concealment of Biden's mental state. Who knows if Biden had any input into his autopen? What makes anything he signed with an autopen credibly signed?

@BBBxCumDumpster, you may be a good politician but you're no statesman. Give me someone who can create peace and understanding across the mythologies of tribes rather than foment EITHER/OR-ism and selective blindness any day.

but I think my favorite is when a guy grabs my ass without any words or while introducing himself, or slips his hand down my shorts and puts his finger on my hole.

I liked when a guy told me he wanted me slipped down to his base, also liked when a guy said he wanted to leave a load in me and tell everyone I was full of his seed.

Doesn't that have its greatest (and perhaps only, but on shaky ground on the "only" part) manifestation in imprisonment for crimes? Without wishing to defend the US approach to crime, which needs some serious reinvention IMHO, I think a criminal judgement at a stage or federal level precipitates the removal of a variety of "rights" such as voting rights, etc., depending upon the rules of the jurisdiction.

For us pigs, maybe we should be comparing notes on the HOTTEST members of Congress. (congress.gov as dating app?) Here’s a link to headshots: [think before following links] https://www.congress.gov/members?pageSort=name&q={"congress"%3A"119"} Just a few here to seed the list. I like Dan Crenshaw’s pirate look. Brandon Gill’s pretty. Sam Liccardo looks like a nice manly romp. Ritchie Torres looks like a cutie. Gabe Vasquez is a swipe yes! Who else?

I think you have a point @Rillion, but I interpret Trumps crazy talk as having a purpose that bidens crazy talk lacked, it comes across more as a destabilizing negotiating technique, whereas Bidens crazy never advanced negotiations. But I think Smart people might disagree with me and have great insights. But theres definitely something more EFFECTIVE about Trump than Biden, for better or worse (my perspective but enjoy when people see it differently than I)

@versslut you raise a good point (except I dont agree with your views on meat think it’s super healthy with all the caveats @viking8x6 added. What makes you more concerned about RFK Jr than any of the following ex-leaders of US health agencies, ALL of whom went to work for pharma or agribusiness? Do their entanglements just get a free pass? HHS (Department of Health and Human Services): Alex Azar: After serving as HHS Secretary from 2018-2021, Alex Azar became a senior executive in residence at the Miami Herbert Business School. He previously worked at Eli Lilly and Company as President of their U.S. division. FDA (Food and Drug Administration): Patrizia Cavazzoni: Formerly the head of the FDA's Center for Drug Evaluation and Research, she became chief medical officer at Pfizer. Scott Gottlieb: After serving as FDA Commissioner from 2017-2019, Scott Gottlieb joined the board of directors of Pfizer. Mark McClellan: Following his time as FDA Commissioner, Mark McClellan served on the board of Johnson & Johnson. Andrew von Eschenbach: This former FDA Commissioner later joined the board of Bausch Health. Margaret Hamburg: After leaving the FDA, Margaret Hamburg became a director at Alnylam Pharmaceuticals. Lester Crawford: He served on the board of Bexion Pharmaceuticalsafter his time as FDA Commissioner. Stephen Hahn: Former FDA Commissioner, Stephen Hahn joined Flagship, a company formation firm that helped create Moderna. USDA (Department of Agriculture): Clifford M. Hardin: After serving as Secretary of Agriculture from 1969-1971, he joined the Purina Corporation. Richard Lyng: Former USDA Secretary, he later formed an agricultural consulting firm, Lyng and Lesher Inc.. NIH (National Institutes of Health): Elias Zerhouni: The former NIH Director joined Boston Pharmaceuticals as the new Chair of its board of directors. CDC (Centers for Disease Control and Prevention): Julie Gerberding: After her tenure as CDC Director, she became an executive vice president at Merck, a large pharmaceutical company.

I would almost hazard to assert (no facts here sweet fact-checkers) that the Buddha himself is not as enlightened as any doctor that happened to exist after a Lucky-Strike doctor, naturally they all learned from the profitable glamorous mistakes of their medical predecessors.

What makes people think that we weren’t bought off to forget the wisdom? @pozbearwi without wishing to make your knowledge from god incorrect what makes you think that we’re on a continuous unsubsidized continuous increase of knowledge? I guess In your mental model all rackets ended in the 1950’s? Yet I’ve seen you describe Trump as a treasonous traitor. So only evil in the past that you perceive stopped in the past and didn’t continue into the now? if our doctors were corruptible 50 years ago and they are now incorruptible what will smokers (or pro-vaxxers or food pyramid advocates or [insert current narcissistic hegemonic health blah-blah-blah here)] in 2075? I think most fans of health modernism imagine that technology will break through our current medical superstitions but it won’t be technology it will be people in whatever year that is current being willing to question the momentary orthodoxy based on whether people are their healthiest or not.

Okay another question. Have we stopped learning such that all mistakes are in the past?

You rock! Thanks for making your thought process clear @PozBearWI

@PozBearWI not that you need my permission but you’re welcome to trust anyone you want. Im having a hard time with your reaction though. Do you think that doctors 50 years ago were fundamentally different in their savvy than current doctors are? Don’t just do a shitty red downvote. Share your wisdom and make me smarter. Or without regard to my smartness at least answer these questions: 1) how do you interpret the medical profession’s willingness to endorse the healthfulness of Lucky Strikes 50 years ago? AND 2) if they were fundamentally different than they are now, what makes them trustworthy now? (Or maybe you smoke Lucky Strikes or own their stock so you perceive wisdom in the doctors who advocated that smokers choose Lucky Strikes for their healthy qualities? I know you have a brain @PozBearWI so can you at least share your insights as to why you think the medical profession is more trustworthy now than during the Lucky Strikes era? (Too much to ask?)