Elections Lindsey Graham married to the game never married to anyone but Politics

Hadron90 said:
Lindsay Graham is obviously a closet gay. Who cares. Leave him alone. Ilhan Omar is married to her brother.
Click to expand...
He always gave me super strong Leslie Jordan vibes.
90


To the point that whenever he's tried to do the righteous anger tough guy thing like during Kavanaugh's confirmation it comes off as kinda out of place and comical. But agreed, leave him alone more power to him if he's stayed closeted this long and never got caught in a truck stop sting
 
PEB said:
Click to expand...


Lady G In The House!

Hadron90 said:
Lindsay Graham is obviously a closet gay. Who cares.
Click to expand...

*glances up and down thread*

Everybody? :confused:

Hades86 said:
Fuck that's GROOOOOOSSSSSSSSS. I read it in his gay little voice too. :oops:
Click to expand...

If it at all helps, that is obviously anti-fan fiction. I mean he is a "closeted" ghey and does pay for rent boys at this age and stage on some worst kept secret type shit but that wasn't even penned by an escort. I actually respect him more for not ever having a beard or taking a show-wife. It was just as likely written by Chelsea Handler.




"Allies"



<{Heymansnicker}>

Get Real.

bobgeese said:
Escorts be mad, meanwhile

Click to expand...


<45>

LadyG.gif
 
Both Graham and Cory Booker would be a lot more viable as presidential candidates if they were openly gay. Closet cases come across as untrustworthy
 
Spiritual Sight said:
The original Tea Party was pretty dope. Then the Koch brothers hijacked it and put NeoCon puppets into it and steered it to a different direction. Graham and Rubio were among those infiltrators.
Click to expand...

While I think it's a good idea for smaller groups of people to have their own agenda and vote for it, in practice the Tea Party just served to be against whatever Obama wanted to do that was popular. Is there anything they actually stood for that is supported today?
 
Spiritual Sight said:
The original Tea Party was pretty dope. Then the Koch brothers hijacked it and put NeoCon puppets into it and steered it to a different direction. Graham and Rubio were among those infiltrators.
Click to expand...
True. Very, very true.
 
blaseblah said:
While I think it's a good idea for smaller groups of people to have their own agenda and vote for it, in practice the Tea Party just served to be against whatever Obama wanted to do that was popular. Is there anything they actually stood for that is supported today?
Click to expand...

Lower Taxes, Less Regulation, Opposed to both parties (the status quo), less government. The Tea Party movement started long before Obama. It started before George W.

I think it's a fair red herring to say they were against whatever obummer wanted to do, but it's not fair to relegate them to only that. Obama served as the Left's attempt to hijack the momentum which the Tea Party had already been riding for a decade. What the left had witnessed was a large part of the apathetic population begin to rise up and express their political dissent. Obama's voice was a big FUCK YOU to the status quo. It was a gimmick. He was playing the pied piper but the Tea Party didn't bite.
 
Spiritual Sight said:
Lower Taxes, Less Regulation, Opposed to both parties (the status quo), less government. The Tea Party movement started long before Obama. It started before George W.

I think it's a fair red herring to say they were against whatever obummer wanted to do, but it's not fair to relegate them to only that. Obama served as the Left's attempt to hijack the momentum which the Tea Party had already been riding for a decade. What the left had witnessed was a large part of the apathetic population begin to rise up and express their political dissent. Obama's voice was a big FUCK YOU to the status quo. It was a gimmick. He was playing the pied piper but the Tea Party didn't bite.
Click to expand...

The Deregulation crowd has had their agenda served since the Reagan era, to disastrous results. Not sure why they would choose the Obama era to make their voices heard since (1) they've been getting what they want (2) he didn't raise taxes and (3) taxes had been continuing to decrease even before him.

Obama was the definition of status quo. The left did vote for him hoping for change but he didn't deliver. He continued the Clinton/Bush agenda, continued all our wars, and started several new ones. His big accomplishment was enacting a Republican healthcare plan. I mean it's great we have coverage for pre-existing conditions but it could have been so much better.

Back to taxes though. Democrats have only been proposing to raise taxes on corporations and the extremely wealthy, which is very popular with the public. It's one of their strengths.
 
Last edited:
blaseblah said:
The Deregulation crowd has had their agenda served since the Reagan era, to disastrous results. Not sure why they would choose the Obama era to make their voices heard since (1) they've been getting what they want (2) he didn't raise taxes and (3) taxes had been continuing to decrease even before him.

Obama was the definition of status quo. The left did vote for him hoping for change but he didn't deliver. He continued the Clinton/Bush agenda, continued all our wars, and started several new ones. His big accomplishment was enacting a Republican healthcare plan. I mean it's great we have coverage for pre-existing conditions but it could have been so much better.

Back to taxes though. Democrats have only been proposing to raise taxes on corporations and the extremely wealthy, which is very popular with the public.
Click to expand...
I think you missed the point.

The tea party wasn't a response to Obama. Obama was a response to the tea party.

I never realized it, but while briefly looking into it for this thread, I now see that the Koch Brothers were financing the tea party from long before George W Bush era. When it started gaining steam during the 2000 elections, they pumped money in again and endorsed the NeoCons for congress.

I never knew they were the ones who put Ron Paul into position over it. It was a drastic shift when they put the neocons into the tea party, though. Their message was subversive to Ron Paul's message.
 
Spiritual Sight said:
I think you missed the point.

The tea party wasn't a response to Obama. Obama was a response to the tea party.

I never realized it, but while briefly looking into it for this thread, I now see that the Koch Brothers were financing the tea party from long before George W Bush era. When it started gaining steam during the 2000 elections, they pumped money in again and endorsed the NeoCons for congress.

I never knew they were the ones who put Ron Paul into position over it. It was a drastic shift when they put the neocons into the tea party, though. Their message was subversive to Ron Paul's message.
Click to expand...

That's just not true. No one who voted for Obama even knew what the Tea Party was because it didn't exist yet. Obama became president because he was an extremely charismatic man who promised change and got to run against an awful presidential candidate in the primary and 8 years of Republican failure in the general election. The Tea Party arose as a response to him.
 
Red Dragoniop said:
thanks now tell us how you really feel?? also good information source the daily show haha
Click to expand...
The Daily show sent the bow tie darling of right wing propaganda running for cover and hiding for a few years. Have bit more respect.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Latest posts

Forum statistics

Threads
1,237,053
Messages
55,463,960
Members
174,785
Latest member
JoyceOuthw

Share this page

Back
Top