TampaYankee

Not sure why it happened. I suspect a partial meltdown of the Flash app from all the steaming streaming videos of late. I reinstalled and everything is hunky-dory now. My screen is back to steaming up due to increased oxygen intake needs (heavy breathing) now that the boys are back.

Enough with the back and forth bickering. IT IS OVER!! Let it lie!! I get it: you dont like lucky! Lucky doesn't like you! You both know that. Everyone else knows that. The shit kicking stops here and now!!!! Move on to other business or move out.

Anybody else having issues with the Flirt Flash display -- the upper part of the screen where the model show streaming and dialog box appear. It seems the download never completes in my IE browser i get a abig white rectangle where it should be. In FireFox the box just never shows up. The top of the page starts with the rows of model photos. I haven't noticed any problem with other Flash apps. What's up? Anybody else having problems with the site or is it my computer? Lustful minds want to know. Problem started last night.

Yum!

Wow!! Where can I sign up for lessons?

My initial reaction was this was more news than politics hence my original forum selection. Then I started to anticipate the kind of responses likely, so I caved but it was borderline. Glad you agree with my first instinct. Moving my other thread and this one as well.

The Tea Party is a poison pill for the GOP I believe and that is fine with me. In fact, needed. I wish to see the GOP revert more to classical conservativism and dump the neocons, moralistic nannyism and politics of ethnicity. That is change I can believe in. (I can fantasize anyway.) Of course, the Tea Party could be a poison pill for the country, if the electorate makes bad choices as it did in 2006.

Why the Tea Party is toxic for the GOP By Michael Gerson Michael Gerson is conservative columnist for those not familiar with him.) Wednesday, August 25, 2010 (Michael Gerson is conservative columnist for those not familiar with him.) So the "summer of recovery" swelters on, with Democrats sun-blistered, pestered by bottle flies, sand in their swimsuits, water in their ears. Jobless claims increase, Republicans lead the generic congressional ballot, and George W. Bush is six points more popular than President Obama in "front-line" Democratic districts that are most vulnerable to a Republican takeover. Still, Democrats hug the hope that Obama is really the liberal Ronald Reagan -- but without wit, humor, an explainable ideology or an effective economic plan. Other than that, the resemblance is uncanny. Yet the Republican Party suffers its own difficulty -- an untested ideology at the core of its appeal. In the normal course of events, political movements begin as intellectual arguments, often conducted for years in serious books and journals. To study the Tea Party movement, future scholars will sift through the collected tweets of Sarah Palin. Without a history of clarifying, refining debates, Republicans need to ask three questions of candidates rising on the Tea Party wave: First, do you believe that Social Security and Medicare are unconstitutional? This seems to be the unguarded view of Colorado Republican U.S. Senate candidate Ken Buck and other Tea Party advocates of "constitutionalism." It reflects a conviction that the federal government has only those powers specifically enumerated in the Constitution -- which doesn't mention retirement insurance or health care. This view is logically consistent -- as well as historically uninformed, morally irresponsible and politically disastrous. The Constitution, in contrast to the Articles of Confederation, granted broad power to the federal government to impose taxes and spend funds to "provide for . . . the general welfare" -- at least if Alexander Hamilton and a number of Supreme Court rulings are to be believed. In practice, Social Security abolition would push perhaps 13 million elderly Americans into destitution, blurring the line between conservative idealism and Social Darwinism. This approach undermines a large conservative achievement. Despite early misgivings about Social Security and the Civil Rights Act, Ronald Reagan moved Republicans past Alf Landon's resistance to the New Deal and Barry Goldwater's opposition to federal civil rights law, focusing instead on economic growth and national strength. A consistent "constitutionalism" would entangle Republicans in an endless, unfolding political gaffe -- opposing, in moments of candor, unemployment insurance, the minimum wage, the federal highway system and the desegregation of lunch counters. A second question of Tea Party candidates: Do you believe that American identity is undermined by immigration? An internal debate has broken out on this issue among Tea Party favorites. Tom Tancredo, running for Colorado governor, raises the prospect of bombing Mecca, urges the president to return to his Kenyan "homeland" and calls Miami a "Third World country" -- managing to offend people on four continents. Dick Armey of FreedomWorks appropriately criticizes Tancredo's "harsh and uncharitable and mean-spirited attitude on the immigration issue." But the extremes of the movement, during recent debates on birthright citizenship and the Manhattan mosque, seem intent on depicting Hispanics and Muslims as a fifth column. There is no method more likely to create ethnic resentment and separatism than unfair suspicion. The nativist impulse is the enemy of assimilation. In a nation where minorities now comprise two-fifths of children under 18, Republicans should also understand that tolerating nativism would bring slow political asphyxiation. Question three: Do you believe that gun rights are relevant to the health-care debate? Nevada Republican U.S. Senate candidate Sharron Angle raised this issue by asserting that, "If this Congress keeps going the way it is, people are really looking toward those Second Amendment remedies." Far from reflecting the spirit of the Founders (who knew how to deal with the Whiskey Rebellion), the implied resort to political violence is an affectation -- more foolish than frightening. But it is toxic for the GOP to be associated with the armed and juvenile. Most Americans who identify with the Tea Party movement are understandably concerned about the size and reach of government. Their enthusiasm is a clear Republican advantage. But Tea Party populism is just as clearly incompatible with some conservative and Republican beliefs. It is at odds with Abraham Lincoln's inclusive tone and his conviction that government policies could empower individuals. It is inconsistent with religious teaching on government's responsibility to seek the common good and to care for the weak. It does not reflect a Burkean suspicion of radical social change. The Democratic political nightmare is now obvious and overwhelming. The Republican challenge is different: building a majority on an unstable, slightly cracked foundation. michaelgerson@washpost.com See original article at: http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2010/08/24/AR2010082405001.html

Mark Zandi: Boehner Was Wrong, Stimulus 'Did Exactly What It Was Intended To' Huffington Post | Sara Yin First Posted: 08-25-10 04:10 PM | Updated: 08-25-10 04:10 PM Joining the backlash against House Majority leader John Boehner's (R-Ohio) economic speech yesterday, Mark Zandi, Moody's chief economist, said Boehner was "just wrong" to call the $787 billion stimulus spending "a failure." If there was no stimulus at all, Zandi said, unemployment would be at around 11.5% rather than 9.5%. "I think if we had not had the stimulus, estimates put forward by the Congressional Budget Office are absolutely right: we'd have 2.5-3 million fewer jobs than we'd have today," he said at a Christian Science Monitor breakfast briefing this morning. What needs to change are people's expectations, he said. "The stimulus did exactly what it was intended to do. It was intended to end the recession, jump-start the economy, and it did that," said Zandi, who has advised both Obama and John McCain in the past. As Zandi points out, the government spent "a minor amount" of stimulus money in the first quarter, which jumped to $100 billion in the second quarter and another $100 billion in the third quarter. "It's that key change that provides the economic juice...that's when the recession ended," Zandi said. "This is why the benefits of stimulus are fading, because we've gone from $100 billion in spending to zero." In another excerpt from the briefing which you can view below, Zandi said unemployment could reach up to 10 percent by November elections. "We need 150,000 in monthly payroll gains to stabilize unemployment. We're running at 100,000 at best, probably south of that at the moment," he said. "The math, the arithmetic is clear: unemployment is going to rise." So when can we expect to see those 8 million lost jobs again? "It'll probably take 5 years." WATCH Zandi's remarks at the Christian Science Monitor breakfast at: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2010/08/25/mark-zandi-boehner-was-wr_n_694506.html

I posted another thread on this topic in Lucky's Place before I noticed this thread that already existed in this forum. This is the better forum for the topic. I have moved and retained that other thread as it contains a separate source article.

Ken Mehlman: I'm 'At Peace' With Myself, There's 'Absolutely' Room For Gays In The GOP Amanda Terkel aterkel@huffingtonpost.com | HuffPost Reporting In an interview with the Huffington Post on Wednesday night, former Republican National Committee Chairman Ken Mehlman -- who announced earlier Wednesday that he is gay and intends to join the fight for marriage equality in California -- said he wishes he had come out while he was the face of a historically anti-gay Republican Party platform. Mehlman acknowledged regret that he remained closeted when he led the RNC between 2005 and 2007 -- a time when, as The Atlantic's Marc Ambinder noted, it was "stepping up its anti-gay activities." "The reason I wish that I had been in a different place then, as I am now, is I know the personal benefit of being comfortable with, and at peace with, an important part of your life," Mehlman said. "Until you get there, it's much harder. I'm very glad to be there." The former chairman argued that he tried hard to "expand the party and build the party," but said he wished he had done more for gay rights. Still, he said, "[You] can't look back, you've got to look forward." In the interview, Mehlman was reluctant to address current political subjects, declining to comment on President Obama's progress on LGBT issues and the conservative movement's often-offensive rhetoric toward gay men and women. He did, however, say that there is "absolutely" a place for LGBT individuals in the GOP. "I think the Republican Party is a diverse party with lots of different views, and I think it's a mistake to presume that people who disagree with what I think is the right answer -- which is freedom to marry -- are inherently motivated by divisive instincts," Mehlman said, adding that he thinks conservatives are focusing less on social issues like opposition to LGBT equality and "much more about the size and scope of the government -- spending, deficits, and taxes." Many high-profile LGBT activists have already embraced Mehlman since his announcement earlier Wednesday. "We hope the fact that Ken Mehlman has reached this level of honesty will now encourage other political leaders to reject divisive anti-gay campaign tactics which, as Mr. Mehlman now admits, are purely cynical attempts to manipulate the American public," Gay and Lesbian Victory Fund President and CEO Chuck Wolfe said in a public statement. Openly gay Democratic strategist Steve Elmendorf told the Huffington Post that it was "great for the community to get new converts" because "until we get 51 percent of the American public supporting us on these issues, it's really important that we welcome people who want to come help us." Center for American Progress Senior Vice President Winnie Stachelberg, who is a former Human Rights Campaign executive and longtime friend of Mehlman's, said, "I'm sure there will be plenty of people who will be angry that he came out when he did and after the things that he did, and he probably regrets that more than most people, but I think that having him as part of the team moving forward will only help all of us in this fight." The impetus for Mehlman's coming-out was a Sept. 22 fundraiser for the American Foundation for Equal Rights, which is fighting for marriage equality in California. Mehlman will co-chair the event with Elmendorf and high-profile Republicans including Steve Schmidt, who managed John McCain's 2008 presidential campaign, and Nicolle Wallace, who advised both McCain and President George W. Bush. http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2010/08/25/ken-mehlman-gay-interview-marriage-equality_n_695040.html

Maybe the General is just bitter at spending a lifetime fighting the urge to give his ass up to all those hunks that surrounded him for years, and now everyone is saying it's OK. Yeah, that could make someone bitter.

... mine too.

Mine would be to have him walking backwards, toward me, bending over to touch his toes briefly after every third step.

These fossils are past 'ready for retirement' so it is good their time to move on has come. In fact, rumor has it that General Conway's asshole is going to the Smithsonian as an exmple of a simple machine that turns shit into diamonds.

I've seen it many times before. You can draw your own conclusion about what I think about it. Never gets tiring. Wish the quality was better.

I must admit that at first glance I did not know how to interpret the title to this thread. I asked myself: is 'fucking' a verb or an adjective? After a millisecond of thought I decided it didnt matter. Works for me either way. I share your lust for Brent E, in fact all things Brent. Well, two anyway. Just fantasies, I know.

Could it be that election season in upon us once again? Historically, there is a strong correlation between morality laws enforcement and that season. Just sayin'...

That's the MA I know.

I cannot speak for other posters but I challenge you to quote any and all posts of mine or Oz's that single you out for criticism. I wholeheartedly share your opinion and have posted that view publicly on prior occasions. I have thanked you publicly too. We renamed the Pub, in your honor as appreciation of, and thanks for your efforts. People have views about what transpired and post about it. You have done the same on other controversies in the past. That is what forum posters do. Neither Oz or I have attributed blame to one party more than the other. Neither of us has 'called you to task while Matrix skates on.' If you have posts otherwise then please quote them and reference the thread. Lucky, I'm growing impatient with your inaccurate attributions about what I and others post about you or to you. Please recount what we post accurately, not your distorted inferences. I challenge you to produce a post that supports any indication of equivalence judgment about or rating of posters on our part. With the exception of Oz's public posting contest last year, Neither Oz nor I have never rated posters in this instance or in general. Frankly we have better things to do with out time. I have privately communicated to you that many varied posters are needed for a vibrant forum. That includes you and them as long as everyone observes the policies. How you draw your view from that remark baffles me. Lucky, you have a proclivity to infer things that posts just do not support. Please try to do better. It makes for less confusion in discussions. We all are prisoners of our past. We all have picked up baggage to some extent along the way. Some of it we invite, some of it we don't. I speak from my experience on the old HB site. The amount gathered is usually proportional to the amount of coflict we engage in. Some people have long memories, some carry grudges, some try to let go until they interpret a provocation they choose not to let pass. I wish it were otherwise. We ought to be able to post without provocation and let the past remain in the past. However, as long as people perceive provocative posts and hold past grudges there will be temptation for conflict. I do not justify it. I just explain the cause and how we can avoid it if we desire to. As mentioned, we renamed it in honor, appreciation and thanks for your efforts. Our feelings haven't changed. We remain appreciative and thankful. We haven't endorsed their comments about you anymore than we have endorsed your comments about them. The comments of all posters are entirely the views of the posters and do not represent the view of the site or site admins. You guys are having a cat fight, plain and simple. You want to drag us into it. Our position is the cat fight should cease and everyone get beyond it. We are not going to blame one party over the other since it could not have happened without the willing participation of both parties. It was unnecessary to have ever come up. I regret your post that initated events. I regret Matrix's response that got unnecessarily personal. I regret the post of past laundry between you and Matrix and his follow up to that. None of it was necessary. None of it was productive. If someone posts something that offends you then ignore it unless you want conflict. Otherwise, do not be suprised if you get conflict. Conflict leads to grudges and long memories. It really can be a counterproductive annoyance in the long run.

Glad you had a great time, if expensive. There are some really hot guys. I'm partial to the Colombians but I find lots of others too. As for the guys, you are gonna get all types. Active and passive. Some guys will vary with the time of day as some stay on for long hours and get tired or bored. The good thing is that it is easy to move on until you find someone that holds your attention. As you no doubt have observed, some of the guys ( a few) when they feel are near closing on a private with a customer, they get very energetic and free with the goods. Sort of chumming the waters. I have seen blow jobs, rectal digital insertions, split cheeks, masturbation, dick posing, foreskin frolics, self sucking... It last for a few minutes at most with either a private ensuing or moving on to the next customer. Worth watching when you catch them. Hit or miss. Certain guys will do this. Others wont give a freebee under any circumstances. Doesnt take long to learn who.

You and lookin' are just two examples of what makes this melange of characters such a fun and entertaining place this can be. We need our Luckys and zippers, and daddy too (if he is here for the fun and enjoyment). but we have to keep our barbs and sensitivities in check else food fights break out all too easily.

Do I detect a hint that you are ready to settle down with Mr Right if you found him?

Please provide a context and more details about your experience. Thanks.

I think that is great advice and I urge everyone to continue the fun contributions and photo sharing and leave the rancor behind.