Comments on: The Playboy Article (NSFW)

By: savings

savings — Thu, 22 Oct 2009 13:33:35 +0000

nice.

By: Flagstaff

Flagstaff — Sat, 06 Jun 2009 01:28:15 +0000

By: jeffreywturner

jeffreywturner — Fri, 05 Jun 2009 17:10:46 +0000

As inppropriate as it may be, they actually do stumble upon a valid point; the female pundits on the right are much hotter per capita than those on the left or society as a whole.

I have seen maybe one or two really attractive liberal ladies (on Fox ofcourse), but they are few and far between. Most of the lefty ladies look like Rachel Maddow, Joy Behardt, etc.

By: janis

janis — Fri, 05 Jun 2009 13:25:35 +0000

charms of Madame Botox and the sweetly dulcet tones of Cynthia McKinney? Not attracted in the least to the profound intellectual gifts of Babs Boxer nor the profoundly patriotic Napolitano?

Picky, picky, picky……

By: Joliphant

Joliphant — Fri, 05 Jun 2009 13:16:02 +0000

For its targeted demographic its spot on. Its shooting for young highschool and college age boys and men and trying to plant the idea, that conservative women are shrewish and not quite sane.

My own thought would be to do the same to their side, but nature and exposure have done a far better job than any poison pen ever could.

By: molybdanthan

molybdanthan — Fri, 05 Jun 2009 06:40:29 +0000

That’s from a Tool song, and the madness spreads when people take the message to heart. There is so much ugliness in the world. To paraphrase Dr. Laura, the only thing that’s sinful anymore is dessert. And it’s hate-speech to speak out against the many moral outrage coming from the Left.

I remember the ‘artists’ who displayed various religious objects in excrement. Pure filth, every one. Ironically, the Left claimed 1st Amendment rights for such things, whether they came from here or not. They protected degradation, as they practice it now. The Left that wants to take those same rights from us.

By: molybdanthan

molybdanthan — Fri, 05 Jun 2009 05:27:00 +0000

I hoped you were just po’d about the dog analogy.

By: mom2oneson

mom2oneson — Fri, 05 Jun 2009 05:17:17 +0000

believe me I’m the last person for that. I totally agree with you about private charity. I’m not sure how you grouped me in with the grow the gov crowd. I’ve argued alot on here about the dangers of gov programs especially having to do with children.
Thank you for the link I’m glad it’s online.
I agree with you about adopting a needy family. I will say that lower income people seem to be more realistic about helping one another than what I see with middle class and upper middle class. I’ve seens this is my own church. The more well off have this idea that people should just be “referred” to other places there is no way they would ever go adopting a family, unless of course it’s Christmas time and they want to buy presents LOL. It kind of sickens me when people will inquire about “what place can we send this person too” instead of saying “hey who can give something towards ___(need)” and take care of it and let the person get back to their life. I agree with you about the self determination and responsibility, you are 100% right, it’s bad and they totally do have they idea that they know better.

By: molybdanthan

molybdanthan — Fri, 05 Jun 2009 05:01:14 +0000

Again, I urge you to read Bastiat’s The Law. You can read the entire thing here:
http://en.wikisource.org/wiki/The_Law_(Bastiat)

All you’re really going to do is grow the size of government. So little of the money intended to serve the needy actually gets to them. The majority is consumed by Government middle-men. All legally, of course. That’s the way the game is played.

We would all be better off if we adopted a needy family, and took government out of the equation. That, and exercising our right of self-determination. Ask yourself, who are these people that think they know better than you how to manage your life? And why would anyone bestow that awesome responsibility to another?

By: JHancock

JHancock — Fri, 05 Jun 2009 04:50:21 +0000

Also boys less likely to be socially pathologic, and girls statistically have fewer partners when raised with a father, plus risk of child abuse/molestation higher with live-in boyfriend than natural father.

By: mom2oneson

mom2oneson — Fri, 05 Jun 2009 04:33:30 +0000

These leftist women’s influence is a HUGE contributer to poverty of women and children due to their disdain for marriage and male protection and provisions in my opinion. I know there are many families that would be under the poverty line but there is a big difference in the quality of life between an a employed man earning $20K per year with a stay at home wife and 2 homeschooled kids vs a single mother earning $9K with three kids in gov daycare or schools and she is at work all day even though they are both below the poverty line.

By: JHancock

JHancock — Fri, 05 Jun 2009 04:19:50 +0000

Just the party of unmarried women who have no respect for their bodies, future relationships, or actual femininity–who think it’s OK for “boys to be boys” and have the occasional “hate f**k” so long as the woman gets her orgasm too and has the option of aborting the resulting baby.

Essentially the “Hedionist” let’s-all-not-respect-each-other and use-other-peoples-affections-for-our-own-pleasure Party.

By: JHancock

JHancock — Fri, 05 Jun 2009 04:14:19 +0000

That leftist Feminism is more about hedonism than the actual liberation of women.

By: marshmom

marshmom — Thu, 04 Jun 2009 03:03:05 +0000

Well, it would’ve been hard to make a list like this about the liberal women because there aren’t any attractive liberal women.
Hillary Clinton?
Diane Feinstein?
Janet Reno?
Napalitano?
Romer?
And Chemical Sam, you are so right about this man picking women who wouldn’t fight back. I’d have loved to see him put Ann Coulter and Sarah Palin on his little list. I’d also like to ball it up and stick it where the sun doesn’t shine.
This list is truly despicable, hateful and inexcusable. It’s that kind of smut that perpetuates REAL sex offenders and makes them think it’s “okay” to treat women like that. Pig.

By: WarEagle01

WarEagle01 — Thu, 04 Jun 2009 00:40:42 +0000

is men, last I checked: real men who at least think they are manly and actually LIKE WOMEN. That means precious few of them are in the testicularly-challenged Democrat party. I wonder if the “guy” who put this thing together actually thinks men talk like that. I bet a lot of his friends are women.

By: Chemical Sam

Chemical Sam — Wed, 03 Jun 2009 09:15:23 +0000

In this context, its meant to objectify these women; that they need a good **** to get them to shut up/get them back in line. I mean the captions show no playful, respectful attraction, that’s for sure.

By: Chemical Sam

Chemical Sam — Wed, 03 Jun 2009 09:09:51 +0000

I love and trust these women. When they and the three I mentioned speak, and all others who follow their message, I trust whatever comes out of their mouths as accurate, well-intentioned, good for the country. They’re outwardly beautiful because inwardly they love this country, and want to see it improve.

By: Chemical Sam

Chemical Sam — Wed, 03 Jun 2009 09:06:32 +0000

1) That she got on the list ahead of Cindy McCain or Sarah Palin, or Ann Coulter, and
2) That they didn’t refer to her as the Nooner.

Peggy’s been soft on the left a bit these days, I think. I stopped reading the Opinion Journal on line because of her new tone. Apparently the author of this filth hasn’t been reading lately.

It’s a clear sign to me that the author knew exactly what he was doing, because he left out the more powerful targets in his list, the beautiful women I mentioned above, the ones more likely (in his mind) to fight back.

That’s the profile of a man who targets vulnerable women, like a rapist might. How’s that grab you Playboy-writer-dude?

Of course I think he made a mistake thinking that most of them wouldn’t fight back.

By: Rod_Patrick

Rod_Patrick — Wed, 03 Jun 2009 07:02:11 +0000

The article by that Guy (he’s a Devil Incarnate btw) is totally horrible.

It’s really VILE VILE VILE attack to all Conservative women in the country.

That Devil Incarnate should be required to make a public apology against all Conservative Women and to all Americans.

By: E Pluribus Unum

E Pluribus Unum — Wed, 03 Jun 2009 03:22:32 +0000

philandering, diddling, groping and raping his way around the nation’s female population.