Where in my statement could you construe I was portraying her as a âbrainless bimboâ ?
Her irrelevance, has to do with I donât give a fuck who Donald Trump was boning 15 years ago.
She could be PHD material and have invented a cure for cancer, I wouldnât care if trump rogered her, seriously, where do you get I am passing judgment on her, for having a ârelationshipâ with Trump a decade ago?
Nobody really cares about his sexual activities, including his peepee sessions.
The problem is where he sees the need to keep his behavior hidden by paying 130 000$.
This is a tell-tail sign of a puppet in the Office.
You are saying his sexual history predicates an ability to function as POTUS?
Ummm, I get that he has had sex with many people, including Stormy Daniels.
As far as I can see it was consensual. The same canât be said for President Clinton and Juanita Broaddrick, or the woman he was accused of raping in the UK.
I donât care, but donât want this President getting us all killed one day.
If the republicans werenât such hypocrites, theyâd never put him into the White-house. Remember Clinton?
The liberals are consistent on this, free sex, out of marriage relation ships, itâs all cool etc. What was considered normal back then, is now a crime. Some moral standards have changed to the better and many have gone worse.
However, the inconsistency the republican party displays is gross.
On one hand Christianity and Sunday Church, on the other hand the call for minimum sentencing and capital punishment.
Clinton impeach and Trump?
This is the only one I could see that would infer I was intimating she was a bimbo. But you would be wrong, I was suggesting his sex life is irrelevant.
I mean, my values havenât changed, the parties have moved.
For example, I have always pushed for equality of opportunity, across every group, sex, religion, I want equality and in some cases parking spaces for women, a womens forum, or back in london a Thursday afternoon for women only swim, thatâs all good. But the left has moved to equality of outcome, which by definition needs to dig into race, sex, and all the rest of it to achieve itâs outcome, I canât agree with that, at all.
In April 2010, Daniels finally declared herself a Republican candidate. Her decision was inspired by disclosures that the Republican National Committee (RNC) had paid expenses for fundraisers at a âlesbian bondage themed nightclubâ in Los Angeles, stating that the revelations âfinally tipped the scalesâ.[3] She explained that the RNCâs use of party funds for sex convinced her that Republicans represented her libertarian values best: Daniels said she has been a registered Democrat throughout her life, âBut now I cannot help but recognize that over time my libertarian values regarding both money and sex and the legal use of one for the other is now best espoused by the Republican Party.â[26]
Yeah! I am very confused.
Sex is always the big argument in American politics.
What is the legal use of sex? Sorry, but she is a hooker. Hopefully, sheâll be replaced by sex robots soon.
The âpermissiveâ wing of the GOP is growing, while the âfamily valuesâ wing shrinks. Each wing tells itself the other is a necessary evil, or for hardcore libertarians, âwe just donât give a damn.â