|
Post by Vince524 on Nov 29, 2016 19:20:12 GMT -5
With the exception of any extra $, I have a hard time getting upset over this. I do feel the kid is going to be used as a political bat against Trump. Different rules apply to Trump family than Obama family, as was evidenced by that comics skit on Melania. Different rules apply to Trump family than Obama family? I'd really love to know what those "different rules" are that are applying to the Trumps, but I'm not holding my breath waiting in vain for details. We've never had a First Lady with nude pics available online for anyone who wants to check out her bod. Is that one of those "different rules" you're talking about? I remember when people got upset when Glen Beck said something about the Obama girls. That was off limits. But now it's okay to suggest Barron is autistic. And to openly make fun of Melania in a comic skit. And the nude pictures? She was a model. While it's new for a First Lady, like Angie said, if you don't believe in slut shaming, then don't do it. www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/you-can-be-anti-trump-without-slut-shaming-melania_us_579f524ae4b0693164c1b7df
|
|
|
Post by haggis on Nov 29, 2016 21:06:06 GMT -5
People have been using the children of presidents for as long as I've been alive. Shameful crap against Amy Carter and Chelsea Clinton when they were children. And while I was probably still in diapers then, I seem to recall Harry Truman got pretty pissed off about a negative performance review Margaret got from one newspaper. And even I am way to young to have heard "Ma, Ma, Where's my Pa, Gone to the White House, Ha, Ha, Ha."
The children need to be off limits. Including Barron. Adult children who promote their parents politics--that's a different animal.
And shame on Rosie for bringing it up in the first place.
|
|
|
Post by nighttimer on Nov 29, 2016 21:56:19 GMT -5
Different rules apply to Trump family than Obama family? I'd really love to know what those "different rules" are that are applying to the Trumps, but I'm not holding my breath waiting in vain for details. We've never had a First Lady with nude pics available online for anyone who wants to check out her bod. Is that one of those "different rules" you're talking about? I remember when people got upset when Glen Beck said something about the Obama girls. That was off limits. You remember, but you can't be bothered remember the details, huh? When Glenn Beck "said something" about the Obama girls (only Sasha to make it plain), this was coming after he said children of politicians were off-limits---just not OBAMA'S children-- and it wasn't just hypocritical, it was borderline racist. Hey, Vince? NEWSFLASH: I'm not Angie, so don't apply her belief systems to me, okay? It isn't "slut-shaming" to point out Melania posed nude including softcore girl-on-girl action. Those are FACTS, dude and don't jump my shit for pointing out what even semi-mainstream news publications like the NY Post have reported on. She DID it and don't wag your crooked little finger at me because someone is jumping on Barron Trump with rumors he has autism. I NEVER SAID ANYTHING ABOUT THOSE RUMORS and I defy you to prove I did. For 35 years I've been the brother-in-law to an autistic person and I fucking resent your accusation. What's as detestable as mocking children and spreading lies and rumors about them? Right-wing Social Justice Warriors doing the same while simulataneously trying to whitewash the incoming First Lady's tawdry past because "she was a model." . Here's another NEWSFLASH, Vince. Not every model takes their clothes off to make a buck. The suggestion because Melania was a model it's okay is a whole other sort of "slut-shaming."
|
|
|
Post by Amadan on Nov 29, 2016 22:33:24 GMT -5
Okay, Melania did soft porn and most of the Internet has now seen her tits. We know that. I think she (and all public figures) are indeed fair game for comedy skits (else SNL would have been off the air long ago), but what exactly are we supposed to make of her "tawdry past"? That she's a dirty whore and it's okay to speak of her accordingly?
|
|
|
Post by Angie on Nov 29, 2016 23:33:57 GMT -5
Hey, Vince? NEWSFLASH: I'm not Angie, so don't apply her belief systems to me, okay? It isn't "slut-shaming" to point out Melania posed nude including softcore girl-on-girl action. Those are FACTS, dude and don't jump my shit for pointing out what even semi-mainstream news publications like the NY Post have reported on. She DID it and don't wag your crooked little finger at me because someone is jumping on Barron Trump with rumors he has autism. I NEVER SAID ANYTHING ABOUT THOSE RUMORS and I defy you to prove I did. For 35 years I've been the brother-in-law to an autistic person and I fucking resent your accusation. What's as detestable as mocking children and spreading lies and rumors about them? Right-wing Social Justice Warriors doing the same while simulataneously trying to whitewash the incoming First Lady's tawdry past because "she was a model." . Here's another NEWSFLASH, Vince. Not every model takes their clothes off to make a buck. The suggestion because Melania was a model it's okay is a whole other sort of "slut-shaming." Uh...not sure how he was applying my belief system to yours. He was just saying he agrees with me that the liberals who call out slut shaming are hypocritical if they now slut shame Melania. Something can be a fact and still be slut shaming. Melania was a grown-ass woman who has the right to bare her ass in an adult magazine if she wants. She is not our president. Do I think it would be awesome for her to pose nude now, as our First Lady? No. I think it would be in incredibly poor taste. But she's still not our president. What she decides to do with her own body, so long as it's legal, has no bearing on how her husband does his job. Just like Bill's past indiscretions would have had no bearing on how Hillary would have done the job.
|
|
|
Post by nighttimer on Nov 30, 2016 20:14:10 GMT -5
Okay, Melania did soft porn and most of the Internet has now seen her tits. We know that. I think she (and all public figures) are indeed fair game for comedy skits (else SNL would have been off the air long ago), but what exactly are we supposed to make of her "tawdry past"? That she's a dirty whore and it's okay to speak of her accordingly? "She's a dirty whore" are your words, not mine. Make of Melania Trump's nude pics what you will. I make of them that they're tacky, tasteless, vulgar and a hot ass mess. Oh yeah. Tawdry, too. Hey, Vince? NEWSFLASH: I'm not Angie, so don't apply her belief systems to me, okay? It isn't "slut-shaming" to point out Melania posed nude including softcore girl-on-girl action. Those are FACTS, dude and don't jump my shit for pointing out what even semi-mainstream news publications like the NY Post have reported on. She DID it and don't wag your crooked little finger at me because someone is jumping on Barron Trump with rumors he has autism. I NEVER SAID ANYTHING ABOUT THOSE RUMORS and I defy you to prove I did. For 35 years I've been the brother-in-law to an autistic person and I fucking resent your accusation. What's as detestable as mocking children and spreading lies and rumors about them? Right-wing Social Justice Warriors doing the same while simulataneously trying to whitewash the incoming First Lady's tawdry past because "she was a model." . Here's another NEWSFLASH, Vince. Not every model takes their clothes off to make a buck. The suggestion because Melania was a model it's okay is a whole other sort of "slut-shaming." Uh...not sure how he was applying my belief system to yours. He was just saying he agrees with me that the liberals who call out slut shaming are hypocritical if they now slut shame Melania. Not really that interested in who or what Vince agrees with. Certainly no more than I take seriously the weak whimpering of wimpy "liberals" wringing their hands that pointing out the inconvenient truth of Melania Trump's nude pics isn't "slut-shaming" at all. What those wimpy liberals are engaging in yet another example of their discredited and rejected politically correct muzzling of free speech. You're entitled to hold that opinion even if it came from somewhere else. I'm entitled to hold the opinion yours is wrong. By that skewed logic if Playboy were still paying grown-ass women to get bare-ass nekkid, she could do it now and claim she is, in your words, "a grown-ass woman who has the right to bare her ass in an adult magazine if she wants." She could do exactly that if she wanted to and Playboy still paid former models and currently imported First Ladies to show off their goodies. I'd STILL assert my right to call it tawdy, tacky, tasteless, and not particularly sexy and I STILL wouldn't bat an eyelash over how many HuffPo essays and wishy-washy "liberals" got upset and called it "slut shaming." I haven't called Melania a slut and for her to be shamed by anyone pointing out it only takes a few clicks to see for yourself what President-Elect Pussygrabber sees every night would be a Her Problem, not a My Problem. [/quote]
|
|
|
Post by robeiae on Nov 30, 2016 22:16:39 GMT -5
Make of Melania Trump's nude pics what you will. I make of them that they're tacky, tasteless, vulgar and a hot ass mess. Oh yeah. Tawdry, too. Melania doesn't care what you think. TM
|
|
|
Post by Christine on Nov 30, 2016 22:48:23 GMT -5
There are better things to criticize Melania for.* Things that do not include her being nekkid. Nekkid is awesome. Go nekkid! Nekkid haters need to chill.
*I won't type them because I'm a nice person.**
**I would delete this post, but I'm not that nice.
|
|
|
Post by Angie on Nov 30, 2016 23:04:13 GMT -5
You're entitled to hold that opinion even if it came from somewhere else. You caught me. All of my opinions come from the alien that lives under my bed.
|
|
|
Post by Amadan on Nov 30, 2016 23:45:36 GMT -5
Who is a wimpy liberal?
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 30, 2016 23:57:31 GMT -5
The alien under Angie's bed.
|
|
|
Post by Angie on Dec 1, 2016 0:56:03 GMT -5
Ugh, you should hear him whining all the time.
|
|
|
Post by Don on Dec 1, 2016 5:28:23 GMT -5
There are better things to criticize Melania for.* Things that do not include her being nekkid. Nekkid is awesome. Go nekkid! Nekkid haters need to chill. *I won't type them because I'm a nice person.** **I would delete this post, but I'm not that nice. "Make Love Not War." When Melania is nekkid, I bet Trump's not thinking about which civil liberty he's going to destroy next, or what knuckle-dragging neanderthal he's going to appoint to office. I sincerely hope she keeps his testosterone level way down while he's in the Oval Orifice. Perhaps the Presidency should come with a large stable of concubines (of the desired gender) to keep The One on an even keel.
|
|
|
Post by Amadan on Dec 1, 2016 6:25:51 GMT -5
Not really that interested in who or what Vince agrees with. Certainly no more than I take seriously the weak whimpering of wimpy "liberals" wringing their hands that pointing out the inconvenient truth of Melania Trump's nude pics isn't "slut-shaming" at all. What those wimpy liberals are engaging in yet another example of their discredited and rejected politically correct muzzling of free speech. You're entitled to hold that opinion even if it came from somewhere else. I'm entitled to hold the opinion yours is wrong. By that skewed logic if Playboy were still paying grown-ass women to get bare-ass nekkid, she could do it now and claim she is, in your words, "a grown-ass woman who has the right to bare her ass in an adult magazine if she wants." She could do exactly that if she wanted to and Playboy still paid former models and currently imported First Ladies to show off their goodies. I'd STILL assert my right to call it tawdy, tacky, tasteless, and not particularly sexy and I STILL wouldn't bat an eyelash over how many HuffPo essays and wishy-washy "liberals" got upset and called it "slut shaming." I haven't called Melania a slut and for her to be shamed by anyone pointing out it only takes a few clicks to see for yourself what President-Elect Pussygrabber sees every night would be a Her Problem, not a My Problem. Given your repeated vehemently-stated lack of interest in what anyone who is not you thinks about anything, this feels a bit like arguing with a Turing Test, but nonetheless, I'll point out that this isn't about "slut-shaming" (a term I also hate). It's about the fact that everyone knows Melania did the deed, and at this point the reaction is "Okay, and?" If you're making an argument that she debases the Presidency by being a First Lady who posed nude, well, there are much bigger things to worry about debasing the Presidency. Since it's unlikely she's going to do any more such posing, hypothetical arguments about a First Lady doing a Playboy spread are also stupid. So what's left seems to be nothing more than repeated carping. "Hurr, hurr, the First Lady POSED NEKKED! Like, she was TOTALLY NEKKID! Like, you could see her titties and everything! She even kissed a girl!" Okay, and? That sort of juvenile baiting is what gave rise to liberals wringing their hands about "slut-shaming," because while the term (like so many PC terms) has expanded to take up so much semantic space as to lose its utility as anything other than an attempt to shut down arguments, it originally denoted a useful concept: discrediting a woman (or her man) solely on the basis that she did (some sexual thing) is cheap rhetoric. What is your point? Do you have one? Melania Trump is a former nekkid model? Got it, duly noted, recorded in the Book of Life and known to all. And?
|
|
|
Post by nighttimer on Dec 1, 2016 15:10:03 GMT -5
Make of Melania Trump's nude pics what you will. I make of them that they're tacky, tasteless, vulgar and a hot ass mess. Oh yeah. Tawdry, too. Melania doesn't care what you think. TMAnd I wouldn't have it any other way. Not really that interested in who or what Vince agrees with. Certainly no more than I take seriously the weak whimpering of wimpy "liberals" wringing their hands that pointing out the inconvenient truth of Melania Trump's nude pics isn't "slut-shaming" at all. What those wimpy liberals are engaging in yet another example of their discredited and rejected politically correct muzzling of free speech. You're entitled to hold that opinion even if it came from somewhere else. I'm entitled to hold the opinion yours is wrong. By that skewed logic if Playboy were still paying grown-ass women to get bare-ass nekkid, she could do it now and claim she is, in your words, "a grown-ass woman who has the right to bare her ass in an adult magazine if she wants." She could do exactly that if she wanted to and Playboy still paid former models and currently imported First Ladies to show off their goodies. I'd STILL assert my right to call it tawdy, tacky, tasteless, and not particularly sexy and I STILL wouldn't bat an eyelash over how many HuffPo essays and wishy-washy "liberals" got upset and called it "slut shaming." I haven't called Melania a slut and for her to be shamed by anyone pointing out it only takes a few clicks to see for yourself what President-Elect Pussygrabber sees every night would be a Her Problem, not a My Problem. Given your repeated vehemently-stated lack of interest in what anyone who is not you thinks about anything, this feels a bit like arguing with a Turing Test, but nonetheless, I'll point out that this isn't about "slut-shaming" (a term I also hate). It's about the fact that everyone knows Melania did the deed, and at this point the reaction is "Okay, and?" If you're making an argument that she debases the Presidency by being a First Lady who posed nude, well, there are much bigger things to worry about debasing the Presidency. Since it's unlikely she's going to do any more such posing, hypothetical arguments about a First Lady doing a Playboy spread are also stupid. So what's left seems to be nothing more than repeated carping. "Hurr, hurr, the First Lady POSED NEKKED! Like, she was TOTALLY NEKKID! Like, you could see her titties and everything! She even kissed a girl!" Okay, and? That sort of juvenile baiting is what gave rise to liberals wringing their hands about "slut-shaming," because while the term (like so many PC terms) has expanded to take up so much semantic space as to lose its utility as anything other than an attempt to shut down arguments, it originally denoted a useful concept: discrediting a woman (or her man) solely on the basis that she did (some sexual thing) is cheap rhetoric. What is your point? Do you have one? Melania Trump is a former nekkid model? Got it, duly noted, recorded in the Book of Life and known to all. And? The point is and was others may attempt to normalize Melania Trump's nude history, but unless and not until someone produces nude pics of Eleanor Roosevelt, Lady Bird Johnson or Pat Nixon, I'm going to deem it abnormal behavior for a First Lady.
|
|