• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!
  • Welcome to our archives. No new posts are allowed here.

Who is angrier?

Who are the angrier members here at DP?

  • MixedMedia and Stace

    Votes: 4 28.6%
  • ptsdkid and aquapub

    Votes: 8 57.1%
  • other - please specify

    Votes: 3 21.4%

  • Total voters
    14
ptsdkid said:
Your poll almost becomes moot from the start. The fact that aqua and myself are conservatives or republicans insures from the previous facts/polls that we are considerably 'happier' than liberals in general.

Here you are pitting two liberal females against two conservative males in the quest to find who is angrier? It has already been established that liberals are less happy than we cons, and that females are much more psychologically unstable and unfit to assume the role of political leadership roles. There are a few exceptions to that rule, however. Conservative women like Condi Rice and Margaret Thatcher are not only happy women--they have the emotional stability to rule in the political and governmental realm.

Until liberal women learn that abortion is murder, and that not having the human capacity to nurture and love that child--you will never show up on any scale of happiness in this world.
So among conservative women there are exceptions, but liberal women are all alike?

You don't know my stance on abortion, and I have loved and nurtured three children. Now try another tack. Tell me why I am unhappier than you. You whose sadness and resentment veritably oozes from at least every other post you write.
 
ptsdkid said:
***What does having a psychiatric disorder have to do with one's happiness? The fact that I was able to overcome some very debilitating combat traumas to the point of where my happiness and goal-oriented ideals have become paramount--make for many engaging public speaking sessions at various medical milieus a sign of my progress and contentment with life.
I still maintain that conservatives are happier people because they have learned the 'work ethic', whereas, liberals depend on others (especially the government) to take care of their every dependable need.

most retards i have ever met are among the happiest people
being retarded doesnt seem to be as bad as some make it out to be
seeing the world through the eyes of a child
simple pleasures are greatly appreciated
i could go on about these cwazy wetards, but i think you get the idea :lol:
 
mixedmedia said:
So among conservative women there are exceptions, but liberal women are all alike?

You don't know my stance on abortion, and I have loved and nurtured three children. Now try another tack. Tell me why I am unhappier than you. You whose sadness and resentment veritably oozes from at least every other post you write.


***Yeah, the exceptions come from conservative women in both politics and abortion. While there is always an exception or two to the general rule--the facts back me up on these two examples.

Lets take abortion first: Remember the feminists--the group of liberal women (NAGS) that claimed to have had women's best interest at heart when shouting/screaming into any available microphone, to any available audience? Their #1 issue has always been for a woman's right to choose murdering their unborn. Notice that there isn't a conservative woman representing this fringe movement. Those people (mostly liberals) that choose murder of loving a potential life cannot be happy with anything they do in life. Seeing how the liberal political platform embraces the option of pro choice/murder--then the majority of if not all liberals are of the pro murder set--therefore they are destined to a life of unhappiness.

Politically speaking: Conservatives=pro life=happiness.
Liberals=pro death=unhappiness.

I got a sizable belly laugh from your statement that sadness and resentment oozes from at least every other post of mine. I am the epitome of happiness; that is why I try so hard to get liblosers on the conservative bandwagon.
It is the liberals that resent successful conservative people. You see it in everything they do and or stand for. Try reading my post upstairs titled 'Liberal love class warfare' to get a better take on how resentful liberals have become. It could also be that you have a hard time in deciphering good dry humor.
 
You guys, a little note on the concept of happiness. Happiness really has nothing to do with having a psychological impairment or not. Like Deejay mentioned, people that are mentally retarded do tend to be happy.

I really though don't think pts should be judged on the fact that he is mentally disabled or whatnot. Some of the most successful people in history have had mental problems. Millions of Americans suffer from depression at some point in their lifetime. Isaac Newton, Van Gogh, Russell Nash, and Howard Hughes were all tremendously successful people with mental conditions. I believe if a person has a good heart, than it doesn't matter if he or she is disabled.

I am not sure why you guys think that pts has gross impairment of thought just because he is disabled. There are many mentally disabled people that go onto college and live normal, successful lives.
 
ptsdkid said:
***Yeah, the exceptions come from conservative women in both politics and abortion. While there is always an exception or two to the general rule--the facts back me up on these two examples.
You mean the facts based on your impression of a handful of women?

Lets take abortion first: Remember the feminists--the group of liberal women (NAGS) that claimed to have had women's best interest at heart when shouting/screaming into any available microphone, to any available audience? Their #1 issue has always been for a woman's right to choose murdering their unborn. Notice that there isn't a conservative woman representing this fringe movement. Those people (mostly liberals) that choose murder of loving a potential life cannot be happy with anything they do in life. Seeing how the liberal political platform embraces the option of pro choice/murder--then the majority of if not all liberals are of the pro murder set--therefore they are destined to a life of unhappiness.

Politically speaking: Conservatives=pro life=happiness.
Liberals=pro death=unhappiness.
Facts? Where's these facts your say you have that can prove this argument? My own IMPRESSION? People who hate are unhappy. Will never find happiness.

I got a sizable belly laugh from your statement that sadness and resentment oozes from at least every other post of mine. I am the epitome of happiness; that is why I try so hard to get liblosers on the conservative bandwagon.
It is the liberals that resent successful conservative people. You see it in everything they do and or stand for. Try reading my post upstairs titled 'Liberal love class warfare' to get a better take on how resentful liberals have become. It could also be that you have a hard time in deciphering good dry humor.
It is the impression I get from reading your posts. That you are a sad and resentful man. Epitome of happiness? Really? Then I don't want to be happy. I am happy to be whatever it is I am then.

And if you think all conservatives are successful you ought to take a trip to southwest Louisiana to see all the poverty-stricken Bush supporters living on the public dole.
 
George_Washington said:
You guys, a little note on the concept of happiness. Happiness really has nothing to do with having a psychological impairment or not. Like Deejay mentioned, people that are mentally retarded do tend to be happy.

I really though don't think pts should be judged on the fact that he is mentally disabled or whatnot. Some of the most successful people in history have had mental problems. Millions of Americans suffer from depression at some point in their lifetime. Isaac Newton, Van Gogh, Russell Nash, and Howard Hughes were all tremendously successful people with mental conditions. I believe if a person has a good heart, than it doesn't matter if he or she is disabled.

I am not sure why you guys think that pts has gross impairment of thought just because he is disabled. There are many mentally disabled people that go onto college and live normal, successful lives.

No one is saying that ptsdkid can't be happy due to his disability....aps was merely pointing out that his particular disability makes it very hard to be a regularly happy person.

The very definition of PTSD encompasses things such as thought impairment.

National Center For PTSD said:
Posttraumatic Stress Disorder, or PTSD, is a psychiatric disorder that can occur following the experience or witnessing of life-threatening events such as military combat, natural disasters, terrorist incidents, serious accidents, or violent personal assaults like rape. People who suffer from PTSD often relive the experience through nightmares and flashbacks, have difficulty sleeping, and feel detached or estranged, and these symptoms can be severe enough and last long enough to significantly impair the person's daily life.

PTSD is marked by clear biological changes as well as psychological symptoms. PTSD is complicated by the fact that it frequently occurs in conjunction with related disorders such as depression, substance abuse, problems of memory and cognition, and other problems of physical and mental health. The disorder is also associated with impairment of the person's ability to function in social or family life, including occupational instability, marital problems and divorces, family discord, and difficulties in parenting.

Again, no one is saying that he can't be happy, but if he has a disability rating of 100% from the VA for his PTSD, he's obviously got it pretty bad, and that seriously screws with a person. I have a friend that has PTSD, she's on a cocktail of medications and still has nightmares and flashbacks. Is she still a happy person? Generally so....she has her days, just like the rest of us. But she also has to be sheltered from certain things that act as triggers for her...which means that she doesn't live a completely "normal" life by our standards.

And you know, ptsdkid wants to judge the rest of us based upon our political views and other little anecdotes we may throw out there, so why shouldn't he be judged upon the one thing that he throws out more regularly than the garbage? If he doesn't want to be judged based upon that, he shouldn't throw it out there like he does.
 
And you know, ptsdkid wants to judge the rest of us based upon our political views and other little anecdotes we may throw out there, so why shouldn't he be judged upon the one thing that he throws out more regularly than the garbage? If he doesn't want to be judged based upon that, he shouldn't throw it out there like he does.[/QUOTE]


***Surprise, I want to judge the rest of you based on your political views. Surprise, this is a 'Debate Politics' forum...isn't it?

Do you think that people (both liberals & conservatives) formulate political opinions just by reading the news? We are all human, (at least most of us). I did start this happiness issue off with an over 30-year long survey that backed up my suspicions that conservatives were the happier of the two.

So backed up with the factual survey--I then went on to submit my personal opinions as a buffer to all this 'garbage' reference.

Wouldn't it make greater sense for me to claim that your personal views were the real 'garbage' since you do not have a legitimate survey to back up your views?
 
ptsdkid said:
***Surprise, I want to judge the rest of you based on your political views. Surprise, this is a 'Debate Politics' forum...isn't it?

Do you think that people (both liberals & conservatives) formulate political opinions just by reading the news? We are all human, (at least most of us). I did start this happiness issue off with an over 30-year long survey that backed up my suspicions that conservatives were the happier of the two.

So backed up with the factual survey--I then went on to submit my personal opinions as a buffer to all this 'garbage' reference.

Wouldn't it make greater sense for me to claim that your personal views were the real 'garbage' since you do not have a legitimate survey to back up your views?

I missed seeing the survey. What thread is it on?

That said, the whole idea that political persuasion is somehow a determinate of your happiness seems a specious theory at best. My happiness doesn't depend on being a liberal. Neither does it depend on how much money I make or who is president or whether Islamic terrorists want to kill me. I am happy because I am an optimist, I enjoy my life and because I feel tremendous love for the people close to me. Which brings me back around to the very real fact that close to half of Americans are not political at all. Some of them are happy, some are not. Don't you think the same things that effect their happiness also effect ours?
 
mixedmedia said:
I missed seeing the survey. What thread is it on?

That said, the whole idea that political persuasion is somehow a determinate of your happiness seems a specious theory at best. My happiness doesn't depend on being a liberal. Neither does it depend on how much money I make or who is president or whether Islamic terrorists want to kill me. I am happy because I am an optimist, I enjoy my life and because I feel tremendous love for the people close to me. Which brings me back around to the very real fact that close to half of Americans are not political at all. Some of them are happy, some are not. Don't you think the same things that effect their happiness also effect ours?


***The survey, I believe it is on the thread 'Who are happier, conservatives or liberals'.

The survey on happiness was taken in context with political affiliations, not with other groups of an apolitical nature.

On a side note: Optimism is certainly key for those wanting happiness in their lives. Its only when one tries to combine a liberal outlook on life with the word optimism that I disagree with. Optimism and liberalism make for an interesting oxymoron. If you can show me one optimistic ideal or one optimistic (forward looking) liberal leader of the U.S. of A--then I'll begin to question my my entire political outlook on things.
 
ptsdkid said:
***The survey, I believe it is on the thread 'Who are happier, conservatives or liberals'.

The survey on happiness was taken in context with political affiliations, not with other groups of an apolitical nature.

On a side note: Optimism is certainly key for those wanting happiness in their lives. Its only when one tries to combine a liberal outlook on life with the word optimism that I disagree with. Optimism and liberalism make for an interesting oxymoron. If you can show me one optimistic ideal or one optimistic (forward looking) liberal leader of the U.S. of A--then I'll begin to question my my entire political outlook on things.

I could give you many optimistic liberal ideals and leaders, but give me one reason why I should bother. Don't you think having complete lack of faith with about 50% of America's registered voters and what they care about and believe is a little lacking in optimism?
 
mixedmedia said:
I could give you many optimistic liberal ideals and leaders, but give me one reason why I should bother. Don't you think having complete lack of faith with about 50% of America's registered voters and what they care about and believe is a little lacking in optimism?


***One reason to bother giving me many optimistic liberal ideals or leaders is because you can't give me even one.

There are about 12-15% more registered Republican than Democrats. Not sure on the specific numbers. Growing red-stated America helps to confirm those percentages. Optimisim as defined for me in relation to politics happened in 1994 when Newt Gingrich and company delivered a rather progressive, important, desirable, viable and extremely optimistic package to congress called the Contract with America. Every item in the contract was geared toward growth, redevelopment, economic, military, and for humanistic needs of the American people. No sooner was it delivered than the Democrats/Liberals in congress started ragging on the proposals by calling it "The Contract on America". Despite having a liberal president at the time in Bill Clinton, and an already Democratically controlled congress--Newt and the Republicans managed to get 9 of the 10 proposals passed. This my dear, was when the optimistic voters got in gear by voting Republican--going on 12 years now--without looking back, and without worrying about the negativity oozing from the Democrat's platform mouthpieces. The only hurdle since 1994 that the Republicans had to overcome was in waiting out the second term of a phony presidency in 1996 of Bill Clinton. The rest of the story is pure optimistic Republican leadership, for the betterment and contentment of it's people.
 
ptsdkid said:
***Surprise, I want to judge the rest of you based on your political views. Surprise, this is a 'Debate Politics' forum...isn't it?

Do you think that people (both liberals & conservatives) formulate political opinions just by reading the news? We are all human, (at least most of us). I did start this happiness issue off with an over 30-year long survey that backed up my suspicions that conservatives were the happier of the two.

So backed up with the factual survey--I then went on to submit my personal opinions as a buffer to all this 'garbage' reference.

Wouldn't it make greater sense for me to claim that your personal views were the real 'garbage' since you do not have a legitimate survey to back up your views?

Debating politics does not mean that you automatically judge someone because their political views differ with your own. You cannot judge someone based on one factor alone, especially that one. I'm sure you don't like it when people immediately write you off when they hear that you have PTSD....and I'm also sure that you wouldn't like it if someone wrote you off because you're conservative. Political views do not make up the core of who a person is, nor do they determine one's level of happiness.

Honestly, polls like that are skewed. Who knows what was going on in those people's lives when they were polled? The actual number of Republicans vs. Democrats that were polled also do not seem to be revealed, so they could have easily questioned more Republicans, which would also skew the results. It could also be affected based upon where the respondants live.....there are a million different factors that you're not considering. I mean, it also says that women are happier than men, so what do you think about that?

A person can be the anti thesis of everything that this poll indicates makes a person happy, and they could be the happiest person alive for all we know. There is just no valid way to measure something like this. Heck, I'd be willing to bet that a large number of these folks lied....think about when some company that you do business with calls and asks you to answer a few questions.....unless you are completely unsatisfied with their service, you usually lie and say they're doing a great job just to get them off of the phone, when in reality, you may think that they only provide mediocre service.

Face it, kid. Happiness is based on many variables, and political affiliation is most likely at the bottom of that particular totem pole.
 
Just commenting on the original question here, but while I think MM has to be one of the very nicest people on this whole board, Stace must have at least a little bit of a mean streak in her. I mean, why else tantalize all the young fellows here (and some that are not so young) with the glimpes of such delightful goodies, the likes of which they they may never hope to sample?

It is only through my own near saintly concerns for the well being of the women (and naughtynurses) of this forum that I have not released any examples from my own latest photo set (The speedo muses, volume 5), because I realize the highly erotic nature of the rope-like musculature of my sinewy inner thighs, the perfect symmetry of my steely buns, the sublimity of my washboard abs and the rather regretable qualities intrinsic to a fabric that refuses to leave anything to the the sorts imaginatons that would run wild even if it were not to cling with such tenacity -- well, I think this may have been too much for them to bear without some sort of psychological trauma. Good thing I'm so nice, myself.
 
Gardener said:
It is only through my own near saintly concerns for the well being of the women (and naughtynurses) of this forum that I have not released any examples from my own latest photo set (The speedo muses, volume 5), because I realize the highly erotic nature of the rope-like musculature of my sinewy inner thighs, the perfect symmetry of my steely buns, the sublimity of my washboard abs and the rather regretable qualities intrinsic to a fabric that refuses to leave anything to the the sorts imaginatons that would run wild even if it were not to cling with such tenacity -- well, I think this may have been too much for them to bear without some sort of psychological trauma. Good thing I'm so nice, myself.
I see you also have PTSD...:2wave:
 
ptsdkid said:
***One reason to bother giving me many optimistic liberal ideals or leaders is because you can't give me even one.

There are about 12-15% more registered Republican than Democrats. Not sure on the specific numbers. Growing red-stated America helps to confirm those percentages. Optimisim as defined for me in relation to politics happened in 1994 when Newt Gingrich and company delivered a rather progressive, important, desirable, viable and extremely optimistic package to congress called the Contract with America. Every item in the contract was geared toward growth, redevelopment, economic, military, and for humanistic needs of the American people. No sooner was it delivered than the Democrats/Liberals in congress started ragging on the proposals by calling it "The Contract on America". Despite having a liberal president at the time in Bill Clinton, and an already Democratically controlled congress--Newt and the Republicans managed to get 9 of the 10 proposals passed. This my dear, was when the optimistic voters got in gear by voting Republican--going on 12 years now--without looking back, and without worrying about the negativity oozing from the Democrat's platform mouthpieces. The only hurdle since 1994 that the Republicans had to overcome was in waiting out the second term of a phony presidency in 1996 of Bill Clinton. The rest of the story is pure optimistic Republican leadership, for the betterment and contentment of it's people.

Barak Obama.
Universal Health Care.
Have at it.

Otherwise, sweetheart, I don't bother because it would be an exercise in futility with you naysaying every word I write - which I could easily do to any list of conservative leaders and viewpoints you would supply if I were so inclined - because we have different beliefs. Difference between us being, I understand that people have different beliefs than me without being an oppressive, egomaniacal boor about it.

I'm a busy person. I work full time, I'm a mother, I'm a moderator and contributor on this board. Do I have time to play ping-pong with you over whether my ideals and the people I admire live up to your personal standards? Um, no. I am a grown woman. I am a liberal. I am an optimist. I know what I stand for. I hardly need your approval.
 
cnredd said:
I see you also have PTSD...:2wave:


Yes, I have to admit -- my Preternaturally Tantalizing Speedo Display becomes a burdon at times, but I try to keep bear it in my typical stoic fashion. Stiff upper, you know......
 
Speaking in the most general of terms, I have noticed that the angriest (sp?) posters here, and on most other forums for that matter, tend to lean hard to the one particular side of the aisle. You can see this evidenced as well on certain News/Talk shows. Why these people are so bitter and insulting and arrogant is beyond me. Bad breeding? Bad upbringing? Ignorance? I truly don't know. It's really kinda sad though. Life is too short to go around speading hate and ******* other people off. Some folks get the same emotional satisfaction out of hate as others do out of love I suppose.:confused:
 
Gardener said:
Yes, I have to admit -- my Preternaturally Tantalizing Speedo Display becomes a burdon at times, but I try to keep bear it in my typical stoic fashion. Stiff upper, you know......
[Sarcastic Moderator Mode]

Please don't use "speedo" and "stiff" in the same paragraph...

The Forum will thank you...

[/Sarcastic Moderator Mode]
 
[I'm a busy person. I work full time, I'm a mother, I'm a moderator and contributor on this board. Do I have time to play ping-pong with you over whether my ideals and the people I admire live up to your personal standards? Um, no. I am a grown woman. I am a liberal. I am an optimist. I know what I stand for. I hardly need your approval.[/QUOTE]


***Never expected you to seek my approval of anything. I just enjoy stating facts by backing them up with my well-intentioned/experienced view on life.

If you ever do find the time to watch a political news program at night or on Sunday morning--I suggest you pay close attention to the words, to the facial expressions, and to the temperments of all the political talking heads. Follow the emotional outbursts and overall demeanor of liberals like John Kerry, Howard Dean, Terry McCauliffe, Ted Kennedy, Hillary Clinton, James Carville, Harry Reid, Nancy Pelosi, Al Sharpton, Jessie Jackson and any other big wigs from the Democratic party. Then tell me with an honest face whether you think these people are angry, enraged, negative, unhappy, short-fused, or if they look to be happy, positive, care-free, forward looking, helpful, on board, non partisan, sincerely engaged and content.

I think your answer (if truthful) would put each one of those characters squarely into the former category.

To keep things fair and balanced--I would also suggest you study the Republican operative counterparts to get a firm take on their overall countenance and demeanor. I think you'll find with the Republicans that there is an overall picture of people engaging, positive, helpful, non partisan, helpful, happy and content in life.

Even the one most vociferous voice among the Republicans (Ann Coulter) is a sweetheart, and she tends to use harmless sarcasm when needed against any Democrat rat fink. Almost every Republican I see on TV has a sense of worth, a sense of responsibility, a sense of worthwhile ideals, a sense of resolution to and for the issues, and a sense of happiness coupled with varying degrees of a sense of humor. I don't see or sense any of these character traits among the most visual Democrats of leadership. You do remember Ronald Reagan's engaging personality and sense of humor amidst a heavily controlled Democratic Congress?

I said before, there are always exceptions to the rule--you obviously being one of them. But the overall majority of liberals are miserable people for the most part. I suspect you have broken the mold because you really don't study the ineffective dangerous platform ideals of the Liberal/Democratic party as we know them today.
 
Last edited:
***Never expected you to seek my approval of anything. I just enjoy stating facts by backing them up with my well-intentioned/experienced view on life.

If you ever do find the time to watch a political news program at night or on Sunday morning--I suggest you pay close attention to the words, to the facial expressions, and to the temperments of all the political talking heads. Follow the emotional outbursts and overall demeanor of liberals like John Kerry, Howard Dean, Terry McCauliffe, Ted Kennedy, Hillary Clinton, James Carville, Harry Reid, Nancy Pelosi, Al Sharpton, Jessie Jackson and any other big wigs from the Democratic party. Then tell me with an honest face whether you think these people are angry, enraged, negative, unhappy, short-fused, or if they look to be happy, positive, care-free, forward looking, helpful, on board, non partisan, sincerely engaged and content.

I think your answer (if truthful) would put each one of those characters squarely into the former category.

To keep things fair and balanced--I would also suggest you study the Republican operative counterparts to get a firm take on their overall countenance and demeanor. I think you'll find with the Republicans that there is an overall picture of people engaging, positive, helpful, non partisan, helpful, happy and content in life.

Even the one most vociferous voice among the Republicans (Ann Coulter) is a sweetheart, and she tends to use harmless sarcasm when needed against any Democrat rat fink. Almost every Republican I see on TV has a sense of worth, a sense of responsibility, a sense of worthwhile ideals, a sense of resolution to and for the issues, and a sense of happiness coupled with varying degrees of a sense of humor. I don't see or sense any of these character traits among the most visual Democrats of leadership. You do remember Ronald Reagan's engaging personality and sense of humor amidst a heavily controlled Democratic Congress?

I said before, there are always exceptions to the rule--you obviously being one of them. But the overall majority of liberals are miserable people for the most part. I suspect you have broken the mold because you really don't study the ineffective dangerous platform ideals of the Liberal/Democratic party as we know them today.

I would say then that perception is kind to the mind of the see-er. For I see things the exact opposite of you, ptsdkid. If this were not the case, why would I be a liberal?
 
I think O'Reilly is an angry man.

Coulter a sweetheart? You're kidding right?

<flush> There goes credibility down the toilet.....

She is one angry :censored . Period. Case closed. :roll:

I also think Bill Maher could be considered an angry person too if we wasn't so damn funny about it.

The Clinton haters...not much different than the Bush haters. Operative word here...haters.

The GOP/Rove slime machine....driven by hate.

The dems/liberals have their haters too. No doubt. It just seems the right is more prevelent and obvious.

Me pointing that out might even get me labeled a hater by these same angry people. Just point out a flaw or ideological idiocy from the right and watch the attacks as they fly. Angry folks indeed over there.

Cindy Shenann is angry. She lost her son. Because that anger is pointed at President Bush, she is now considered an angry "liberal." Other than her disdain for the man that is indirectly responsible for her son's death, I know of no other liberal tendancies attributed to her. I submit she would be just as angry at a democrat or left wing president who's flawed policies caused her to lose a child.

I have some news for everybody. You don't have to be a liberal to be angry at Mr. Bush. Just wise.

Just MY 2 cents. Just my "well-intentioned/experienced view on life. "
 
Last edited:
Gardener said:
Just commenting on the original question here, but while I think MM has to be one of the very nicest people on this whole board, Stace must have at least a little bit of a mean streak in her. I mean, why else tantalize all the young fellows here (and some that are not so young) with the glimpes of such delightful goodies, the likes of which they they may never hope to sample?

It is only through my own near saintly concerns for the well being of the women (and naughtynurses) of this forum that I have not released any examples from my own latest photo set (The speedo muses, volume 5), because I realize the highly erotic nature of the rope-like musculature of my sinewy inner thighs, the perfect symmetry of my steely buns, the sublimity of my washboard abs and the rather regretable qualities intrinsic to a fabric that refuses to leave anything to the the sorts imaginatons that would run wild even if it were not to cling with such tenacity -- well, I think this may have been too much for them to bear without some sort of psychological trauma. Good thing I'm so nice, myself.

Mean streak does not equal angry. :mrgreen: Besides, it's not mean....If me posting those pictures is mean, then advertisers are mean, too, since they have ads with half naked women that are much better looking than myself, and the men that see those ads certainly don't have a chance with them!!!
 
Gardener said:
Yes, I have to admit -- my Preternaturally Tantalizing Speedo Display becomes a burdon at times, but I try to keep bear it in my typical stoic fashion. Stiff upper, you know......

BTW.....thanks for visiting my most firstest thread in the basement, Gardener. An honor I share with my esteemed colleagues - on the left and right.

Don't you think he's funny, ptsdkid? As a fellow appreciator of the humorous arts?
 
Look at that Mixey, we've got four votes....one of them is rather obvious, but I have a pretty good guess where the others came from :mrgreen:
 
Back
Top Bottom