Search results for query: *

sex addict

“Marxist rhetoric”, unvarnished no less!!! Is that worse than eating rice barehanded? In your rush to defend Trump, you conflate Putin with Russian oligarchy.

Do you see any irony?

If Trump is now favors of the bill that requests him to order the DOJ to release the files, he can simply get going and sign the order - no need to wait for Senate action.

We seem to inhabit completely different universes. The Democrats and liberals haven’t changed their tune. MTG claims to have left behind her vituperative nonsense. She didn’t support his refusal to release the documents.

I realize this is one of my myriad character flaws, but I can’t help thinking this vicious wackadoodle is getting her deserved desserts.

I wonder if this is the result of new meds or being taken off meds. Otherwise, this is just temporary.

No, it isn’t. You’re misreading the responses. MTG is finally acting rationally and perhaps waking up to the fact she vigorously supported a monster.

Yeah, because there is nothing sleazy about 30+ men purchasing sex from teenage girls. Having parented a teen girl and who listened to her many friends, they found older (10+ yrs) men hitting on them to very creepy. Maybe they aren’t a representative sample, but I’d need evidence to convince me...

Of course. I'm sorry, but Fascism has an actual meaning that is well-known. Now, if people want to use fascism to mean violent poopy-heads, then they should expect others to explain their "metaphors". The right-wing qualifier arises from history. Blaming history or the Oxford dictionary...

You pulled that one right out of your ass.

In addition, since his press secretary said tariff increases are tax cuts for US citizens, tariff cuts are tax increases.

One word (pedophilia) is more concise (fewer words) than six words (victims under the age of 18). You realize your hole is getting deeper, not shallower.

Why exclude admitted but uncharged pedos? How many examples are in a “ statistically significant” sample? You’re working pretty hard to obscure the obvious.

To be fair and honest, I don't read every exchange. As I get older (not necessarily wiser), I try to avoid exchanges that evolve into what people meant in part because I find them confusing. For example, I have no idea why the slave trade matters in this discussion. I'm not perfect about...

I know she was a victim of circumstances. I wrote “teenagers”. She claimed to be 18. I stand by my statement. There are plenty of reasons to think Matt Gaetz is sleazy. Do you need a list? I know I didn’t say anything like that because I have no idea about your “whataboutism”.

She was a victim of circumstances. IMHO, it is sleazy for men of Gaetz’s age snd higher to buy sex from teenagers. Certainly without such sleazes, the demand for teenage prostitues would be much less,

You really cannot see how a homeless teenager turning tricks in order to get enough money fix her teeth might be seen as a victim?

I didn’t. I don’t have ESP. I get the original statement could be taken as you and others have said.

Engaging in the text by saying “I don’t understand” is different than “No, it means ______”. The former prompts clarification, the latter doesn’t.