Because Kamala

[Rick]

This is exhibit #1 of when evil is the moral compass of the Democratic Party today. 

https://americanprinciplesproject.org/w ... -Final.pdf

https://www.foxnews.com/media/new-repor ... n-colleges

"The 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals ruled unanimously that the ED unlawfully applied an incorrect standard to determine the university’s nonprofit status." 

Other than Fox, I have not found this report in any other major news source. 

Edited November 29, 2024 by Rick

[Ivanhoe]

Your links are broken.

 

[Rick]

2 hours ago, Ivanhoe said:

Your links are broken.

 

Hhmmm...

https://www.foxnews.com/media/new-report-shows-70-biden-administrations-education-enforcement-targeted-christian-colleges

[Ivanhoe]

That one works. Here is the report;

https://americanprinciplesproject.org/wp-content/uploads/2024/11/DOE-Office-of-Enforcement-Report-Final.pdf

 

[Murph]

Oprah= $10 million to her "company"

Twerking fool= over $1 million

etc etc, yes, it is true, and yes they are in debt because of blowing over $1.4 billion dollars in funds.  

[DKTanker]

9 hours ago, Murph said:

Oprah= $10 million to her "company"

Twerking fool= over $1 million

etc etc, yes, it is true, and yes they are in debt because of blowing over $1.4 billion dollars in funds.  

Trump's fault.

[Ivanhoe]

A laughable thing is all the Harris-ites who are crying about "only 100 days to prepare" and all that.

Ummm, if you weren't 3 sheets to the wind during normal working hours, you would have realized in May 2020 that Joe wasn't going to finish the game. WTF were y'all doing in the meantime?

[17thfabn]

2 hours ago, Ivanhoe said:

A laughable thing is all the Harris-ites who are crying about "only 100 days to prepare" and all that.

Per her statements she was going to do everything like Biden, or Obama or who ever really was running the government. So she should have just been able to run with the Biden etc. play book.

[Ivanhoe]

9 hours ago, 17thfabn said:

Per her statements she was going to do everything like Biden, or Obama or who ever really was running the government. So she should have just been able to run with the Biden etc. play book.

In the video I posted, the Harrisite said something about "we had no platform" as if every Dem POTUS candidate was required to work up a platform from scratch. Like, gee, what issues might resonate with voters? How would we figure that out in less than a year?

[Stargrunt6]

Speaking of resonating with voters, I'm not over the "Men for Harris" ad.  The sheer ridiculousness of the approach is tattooed on my brain.  A bunch of dudes saying "I care about women."  Nothing about what Kamala is going to do for men.  Was this thing written by women? 

[Rick]

On 11/29/2024 at 12:39 AM, Skywalkre said:

They appear to be BS.  If they made payments like that they'd have to report them in financial filings and there aren't any per the articles I found.

Most likely this is another case of folks seeing a number for something, not understanding it, and in typical MAGA fashion construing a reality they want to believe.  There are filings for payments to Oprah's company, for example, but that doesn't mean it was payments for her.  Rather, it was the campaign paying Oprah's company to put the event together and everything associated with that.  Another article I found mentioned that while a big time performer may campaign for free there are rules about paying band members to play for them so those folks are getting paid.

These events aren't cheap.  Let's not forget the hundreds of thousands of dollars the Trump campaign owes various municipalities going back to '20.  Some of the figures folks are misconstruing for these big names was likely the Harris campaign actually paying all their bills to cover these big time events (something the Trump campaign is... still working on... maybe... some day...).

From a horse's mouth of the Democratic Party

https://news.yahoo.com/news/carville-harris-campaign-unfathomable-spending-145719753.html

[DKTanker]

8 hours ago, Stargrunt6 said:

Speaking of resonating with voters, I'm not over the "Men for Harris" ad.  The sheer ridiculousness of the approach is tattooed on my brain.  A bunch of dudes saying "I care about women."  Nothing about what Kamala is going to do for men.  Was this thing written by women? 

By women or perhaps simps.  A difference without distinction.

[Skywalkre]

5 hours ago, Rick said:

From a horse's mouth of the Democratic Party

https://news.yahoo.com/news/carville-harris-campaign-unfathomable-spending-145719753.html

There's nothing in that article to support the notion the Harris campaign paid a lot of money to big names to get them to show up for her campaign.

[Sinistar]

12 hours ago, Stargrunt6 said:

Speaking of resonating with voters, I'm not over the "Men for Harris" ad.  The sheer ridiculousness of the approach is tattooed on my brain.  A bunch of dudes saying "I care about women."  Nothing about what Kamala is going to do for men.  Was this thing written by women? 

deep down the females have no respect for men who behave in this way; it dries up their desire for men who supplicate themselves to women, hoping that the virtue signaling will somehow make the females take off their clothes. whether they admit it or not it is really a cheap mating strategy

 

there was an article i remember reading more than ten years ago where neuroscientists had identified subconscious  activity in the male brain associated with tool use when they are in the presence of females they are attracted to- the hypothesis was that the male brain was using the problem solving part of the brain to figure out how to 'get the girl' so to speak

 

if this is true it is really a low rent strategy by the male brain to get laid- comparable perhaps to species of cuttlefish where males attempt to mimic female signals and body language in order to insinuate themselves among the females, a backdoor attempt at a mating opportunity. a lot of the males onboard with feminism is exactly that, thinking that the virtue signaling will win the favor of the females and therefore which translates into female sexual desire

 

 

 

 

Edited December 1, 2024 by Sinistar

[Rick]

9 hours ago, Skywalkre said:

There's nothing in that article to support the notion the Harris campaign paid a lot of money to big names to get them to show up for her campaign.

Welll... It reads that way to me as a part of the massive expenditures by the Democrats.

[glenn239]

17 hours ago, Sinistar said:

deep down the females have no respect for men who behave in this way; it dries up their desire for men who supplicate themselves to women, hoping that the virtue signaling will somehow make the females take off their clothes. whether they admit it or not it is really a cheap mating strategy

Common sense 101 says that if this 'cheap' mating strategy did not work, it would not exist after millions of years of evolutionary biology.  But it does exist.  Therefore, it does work.

In terms of women having, deep down, no respect for men, I think you might find that whatever merit there is in that statement goes far beyond any one particular mating strategy....

Edited December 1, 2024 by glenn239

[Sinistar]

11 minutes ago, glenn239 said:

Common sense 101 says that if this 'cheap' mating strategy did not work, it would not exist after millions of years of evolutionary biology.  But it does exist.  Therefore, it does work.

 

 

the human genome has been mapped- what it looks like is that most males either did not survive to procreate, or were not being chosen for procreation. at some times the ratio of male to female procreation appears to be lopsided up to 18:1 in favor of the females. this has been demonstrated but many people seem to fail to look at or notice it or look deeper and see the situation for what it is

 

so it isn't working is it-

 

if you were an attractive, high status male or celebrity, it would not really matter what you do- you are still going to attract females. when the average schlub tries virtue signaling, that in itself is not attractive, and it is rather off-putting to women when they see men behaving in this way

 

you see there is a problem with male feminists. on the one hand they are always virtue signaling in order to establish what they are in the minds of females as trust worthy allies; then when it comes time to put a move on a female, well now the behavior is incongruent with what they were doing previously- the male who supplicates to woman is now just like every other creep who was using that as a means to get laid, presenting themeslves as a friend and then as a mating partner. this is what women often claim is the problem with 'nice guys' - their incongruent behavior makes it look like the whole nice act was a really a ploy just to get laid

 

 

[glenn239]

3 minutes ago, Sinistar said:

 

the human genome has been mapped- what it looks like is that most males either did not survive to procreate, or were not being chosen for procreation. at some times the ratio of male to female procreation appears to be lopsided up to 18:1 in favor of the females. this has been demonstrated but many people seem to fail to look at or notice it or look deeper and see the situation for what it is

The human genome has been mapped.  The interplay between immensely complex variables of genetics and other factors upon behavior has not.  Mapping the genome and claiming that the science of human behavior is understood is like going to the Moon and declaring that the Galaxy has been explored.

Quote

if you were an attractive, high status male or celebrity, it would not really matter what you do- you are still going to attract females. when the average schlub tries virtue signaling, that in itself is not attractive, and it is rather off-putting to women when they see men behaving in this way

The concepts of high status is one thing, the concept of respect is another.   They can overlap.

 

Quote

This a problem with male feminists. on the one hand they are always virtue signaling in order to establish what they are in the minds of females as trust worthy allies; then when it comes time to put a move on a female, well now the behavior is incongruent with what they were doing previously- the male who supplicates to woman is now just like every other creep who was using that as a means to get laid, presenting themeslves as a friend and then as a mating partner. this is what women often claim is the problem with 'nice guys' - their incongruent behavior makes it look like the whole nice act was a really a ploy just to get laid

You have an amazing variety of interesting opinions on virtually any topic, all delivered with a quaint inattention to punctuation, and sometimes posted surprisingly quickly.   Tell me about yourself.  

[DKTanker]

16 minutes ago, glenn239 said:

Common sense 101 says that if this 'cheap' mating strategy did not work, it would not exist after millions of years of evolutionary biology.  But it does exist.  Therefore, it does work.

In terms of women having, deep down, no respect for men, I think you might find that whatever merit there is in that statement goes far beyond any one particular mating strategy....

As a mating, reproductive strategy, it most certainly does not work.  Legion are the beta's raising children of Alphas.  Biologically women want the genes of Alpha for their off spring.  Biologically Alpha males want to sow their seed amongst as many females as possible, and they are quite successful at it.  Betas are useful to women as providers after being inseminated by Alpha; Beta's reward is a steady sexual outlet.  And biologically, that's about the extent of it.

[glenn239]

4 minutes ago, DKTanker said:

As a mating, reproductive strategy, it most certainly does not work.  Legion are the beta's raising children of Alphas.  Biologically women want the genes of Alpha for their off spring.  Biologically Alpha males want to sow their seed amongst as many females as possible, and they are quite successful at it.  Betas are useful to women as providers after being inseminated by Alpha; Beta's reward is a steady sexual outlet.  And biologically, that's about the extent of it.

By that logic Betas don't exist because Alphas did all the reproducing.  Females want a variety of mates, not just Alphas.   And, since Alphas repel other Alphas, the Betas are the ones to provide the required service on the sly.

Edited December 1, 2024 by glenn239

[Sinistar]

5 minutes ago, glenn239 said:

 

The concepts of high status is one thing, the concept of respect is another.   They can overlap.

 

 

 

many males in western culture at least are walking around with ideas in their minds about what females are attracted to, and a lot of this is skewed towards a female perspective, that is to say, so many men have been feminized and you see literally the testosterone levels in the developed world dropping and the low birth rates. this is no coincidence

 

 

 

[glenn239]

Just now, Sinistar said:

 

many males in western culture at least are walking around with ideas in their minds about what females are attracted to, and a lot of this is skewed towards a female perspective, that is to say, so many men have been feminized and you see literally the testosterone levels in the developed world dropping and the low birth rates. this is no coincidence

 

 

 

Second request.  

You have an amazing variety of interesting opinions on virtually any topic, all delivered with a quaint inattention to punctuation, and sometimes posted surprisingly quickly.   Tell me about yourself.

[Sinistar]

3 minutes ago, glenn239 said:

By that logic Betas don't exist because Alphas did all the reproducing.  Females want a variety of mates, not just Alphas.   And, since Alphas repel other Alphas, the Betas are the ones to provide the required service on the sly.

 

the females have a dual mating strategy that they have to resolve- on the one hand they need healthy strong genetics to pass onto their offspring. on the other, they need the committment of the so called beta males- the nice, sensitive guys who will be there to take care of their offspring. so this the dilemma that the females need to resolve.

 

a lot of guys fall into the nice sensitive guy category not understanding how this works

 

the female ovulation cycles show what is going on- when they are at the most fertile cycle and likely to conceive, they prefer the more masculine features and behaviors (genetic donor), then during the rest of the month when they settle down and regain their senses or are not as interested in sex, then they show preference for the 'nice guy's' because those are the sensitive caregivers to help raise the offspring and provide care and resources to the female

 

researchers have been wondering why of primates, the human female conceals external signs of ovulation seen in other primate species (eg, the large swollen butts)

 

a theory put forward is that the female evolved that trait as a life strategy, because in the past males could not be sure of paternity, so males may be more likely to raise the offspring of females sired by other males. the 'nice guy' construct is something the females have created as part of their mating strategy, so behaviors like chivalry and so on- which literally had nothing to do with females in its original conception of it- it was a code of conduct between men- has been somewhat hijacked to mean male behaviors towards females

[17thfabn]

1 hour ago, glenn239 said:

Second request.  

You have an amazing variety of interesting opinions on virtually any topic, all delivered with a quaint inattention to punctuation, and sometimes posted surprisingly quickly.   Tell me about yourself.

It is interesting, he never capitalizes words, and seldom ends a sentence with a period. 

Perhaps the shift key & period on the keyboard is broken?

Now on the subject of getting women:

Tim Walz seems to have procreated, so there is hope for most any one!

In all seriousness, if you want the secret on how to get women I will give it to you now! 

It is a seven step process.

Step 1. 

Oh sorry, I have to go......

[DKTanker]

2 hours ago, 17thfabn said:

Tim Walz seems to have procreated, so there is hope for most any one!I

We don't actually know that, now do we?  What we do apparently know is that his wife was artificially inseminated.  Not in vitro fertilization as some wanted to contend.  Mainly abortionists, and Tim Walz, who were making the false claim that GOP wanted to ban such methods as part of the pro-life agenda.  But, as Tim Walz was forced to clarify, his wife was impregnated through intrauterine fertilization using a sperm donor.  Said donor might have been Walz, might have been Chad.  That item of information wasn't made public.