The Goat Pen

I prefer to cast a wider net. I look at the Mom and if there are any sisters on the dad's side.

My wife took after her father's side of the family, physique style. It was obvious at 25 (when I initially met her) that she wasn't carrying her mother's attributes, in that category. She does eat as poorly as her mother, though, but no weight shows up on her. The kids have added a little junk in her trunk (that both of us are very pleased about), but she still has a track athlete's body.

So, look at the mom...and the aunts.

"so he should have had her killed? "

That would've made the CIA look a whole lot cooler...

hedge wrote:"so he should have had her killed? "

That would've made the CIA look a whole lot cooler...

unmanned drone attack on his mistress?

"hedge or e should be able to help me here, wasn't Jill Kelly the name of a famous 80s porn star?"

I'm sure the porn industry already has 4 or 5 spoofs of this whole affair in the works. It would be cool if Jill Kelly (porn star) made a comeback in one of them. What would they call it? 0069 (take off on 007)? I know that's British CIA, but still. I Laid Petreaus?

"I know that I don't look that much different from 20 years ago. I mean there's a little more weight and a little less hair but not a sea change like that. "

In 10 years, you will look like Tom Hamm....

my wife's mom is like 66 now and looks good for her age. Granted, a good portion of her day is spent primping if she is going to go out on the town but if I was a 70 year old man and still actually cared about getting pussy - I can assure when I am 70 I will not - I'd hit it.

Dating the girl in the middle. We dated back in 85-86 in High School. Those 26 years haven't been that bad. At least not as bad as that Generals

Jungle Rat wrote:Dating the girl in the middle. We dated back in 85-86 in High School. Those 26 years haven't been that bad. At least not as bad as that Generals

Well done. I'd hit it.

What do you talk about with her after you've exhausted all your taking a dump stories?

What position she wants to try tonight.

Any other questions?

Here's her with DS's last date at Jungle Jims.

Bklyn wrote:

Jungle Rat wrote:Dating the girl in the middle. We dated back in 85-86 in High School. Those 26 years haven't been that bad. At least not as bad as that Generals

Well done. I'd hit it.

I HAVE hit it.

jacking off to the photo doesn't count, fattie

Heh

Jindal has been giving body blows to Romney since the election. He's trying to position himself for the future. I think he has an uphill battle to get national traction. I think the GOP's great brown hope is George P. Bush (JEB's son). I've watched his movements the last 10 years, or so, and he's shrewd. He has Florida roots, Latino heritage and a Texas address. If anything, though, the Bush brand is a bit of a drag on him. However, he should be in a good space by 2020 to make some serious noise.

Jindal is certainly a form of backlash to the old guard , to which Romney tries to support, that led to the party of exclusion the GOP has become.

Worse, the GOP doesn't attract the intellectuals anymore as their key demographic is rural America. Unfortunately while they've learned they can galvanize that segment against a common foe, currently the easy to sell black Muslim giving handouts to welfare queens in office, , they can't count on rural America to back their play in Congressional seats as they have shown they'll choose a single mandate candidate over a moderate Washington beltway candidate.

In some ways I'm learning a hard lesson about Libertarianism as well. While it has a strong grassroots support to create an agenda at the national level, it doesn't work as well at the local level. American politics is most effective at the local level where compromise and legislation are the order of the day. Local politics have never really had much challenge with fiscal responsibility as they are mandated to balance budget as well - so there is little need for a strong libertarian presence on the fiscal side and the social agenda is little more than a noise, fence or pet ordinance. Because its not easily established at the local levels, its hard to coordinate and take off at the national level. There are no "building blocks" to create a formal organization on.

At least that is how I see it today.

Yep, libertarianism doesn't really work at the local level, at least in terms of economics. I still approve of libertarian social ideals on the local level, but at some point, shit has got to be paid for. That's what libertarianism is to me, stop funneling so much money out of local communities and into Washington. Let the local people decide how to tax and spend their own money at the local level...

hedge wrote:Yep, libertarianism doesn't really work at the local level, at least in terms of economics. I still approve of libertarian social ideals on the local level, but at some point, shit has got to be paid for. That's what libertarianism is to me, stop funneling so much money out of local communities and into Washington. Let the local people decide how to tax and spend their own money at the local level...

This is what we need to do Hedge. Unfortunately, this is entirely at odds with the Democratic Party and the Obama Administration (that I'm guessing, you voted for...) Here is a community that (at the local level) should have the right to tax and spend their own money as they see fit. Well call them community #1.



Here is a community that is functionally incapable of taxing and spending their own money as they see fit partially because you can't pay too many property taxes out of an EBT card. We'll call them community #2.



#1 looks nice because there is pride in ownership. #2 does not look quite as nice because the people there don't own anything.

#1 might not have huge social capital needs as the people in that community are likely to look out after each other and watch each other's kids. #2 doesn't have any social capital and the parents that are there are probably less likely to sheppard their own children, let alone, watch out for anyone else's.

It would be unusual to see any police cars reporting to calls in #1 (aside from the occiational break-in.) At #2, the police need to be there round the clock (and in full force) because crime is a way of life.

#1 may not have a school district where the teachers are paid the best, but the parents volunteer their time. #2, the teachers probably make pretty good money partially because their lives are endangered, but mostly because no one would want to teach in a school where there will be almost NO volonteer help from the parents in the local community, a community where the kids aren't as interested in learning because when they come home, they all say "Where's daddy?".

So what does the Democratic Party say to this to fix this situation.

Tax community #1, send that money back to DC, and then redistribute that money back to #2 to make them "whole." They is all they know how to do, but the only thing that fixes is making more voters to vote Democrat. That is the main reason why the Libertarian Party can't do anything at the Federal level.

Both of those communities look like a version of hell to me.