Who Is Best For The Hobby?

[ICU 812]

Ok-ok-ok . . .its my turn at humor rising from unsubstantiated rumor:

I think that everyone missed the mark when the Lowensky story was all any one talked about. The real scandal at the Clinton White House was how much Chelsae Clinton looks like Amy Carter!

[Mr MojoRisin]

Originally Posted by ICU 812

I don't usually lurk here, so this post may be redundant . . .sorry.

So we are winding up what is/was the most liberal administration in US history. So much has been liberalized in regards to LGBT issues . . .and recreational issues that may not be mentioned on this forum.

Yet The Hobby has been hounded about everywhere by both local and Federal LE.

Avoiding the Red-Blue/Left-Right discussion that may not convince anyone to come over to the other side: Who will be the best candidate for The Hobby?

My take is that both major candidates are deeply flawed people who will do or say whatever seems expedient at the time without regard to any framework of principles.

Bernie Saunders (not my guy by the way) did seem to have a strong set of core principles that he didn't back down from.

Gary Johnson however is the Libertarian candidate. He supports legalizing many things including pay-for-play between consenting adults.

He is on the ballot for president in all 50 states; a viable alternative. The clock is running, but it is still early with over 5 months till Election Day. Johnson only needs 33% of the Electoral Collage votes to send the election to the House of Representatives, and 54% to win it.

Give him a look and think about him for a few months. He might be what The Hobby needs.

Keep in mind Presidents can be in favor of anything they want. It's congress that enacts what becomes law and what doesn't and what can be legal and what remains criminal. But I agree Prostitution could and should be legalized to some extent.

Jim

[Jackie S]

Come on guys. This presidential election is about a lot of things. Important things.

But the number one is not whether we will still be able to pay a hooker to suck our dicks.

[ICU 812]

Originally Posted by Jackie S

Come on guys. This presidential election is about a lot of things. Important things.

But the number one is not whether we will still be able to pay a hooker to suck our dicks.

How right you are! there is the continued erosion of the Frrst, Second, Forth and Fifth amendments and the rest of the Bill of rights.


The whole idea of the No-Fly List seems sensible, yet the implementation, as practiced, denies Due Process (Fifth Amendment) to those listed.

There is a movement to criminalize the expression of disbelief in the existence of "Global Warming" or "Climate Change". That threat to the First Amendment puts all Atheists and Agnostics at risk.

These examples are not an exaggeration. There are people who view the Constitution, and particularly The Bill of Rights, as impediments to governing.

I lack faith in the character of BOTH of the major candidates this election year. Disregarding the specific differences between Republican and Democrat or Conservative and Liberal; I do not feel that either has the strength of character to be the chief executive in these times. Both have shown that they will say or do whatever is expedient at the time without regard for any guiding principle, let alone the constitution.

I support Gary Johnson because I think he does. I presented his support for prostitution in the OP because that is appropriate for this venue.

No everybody . . . lighten up!

"C'mon . . .that was funny—I don't care who you are."
Larry The Cable Guy

[gfejunkie]

Originally Posted by ICU 812

lighten up!

I was trying, dude.

[LexusLover]

Originally Posted by Jackie S

Come on guys. But the number one is not whether we will still be able to pay a hooker to suck our dicks.

You're correct.

The "number one thing" is whether she has to use a condom when she does it!

[Jackie S]

Originally Posted by LexusLover

You're correct.

The "number one thing" is whether she has to use a condom when she does it!

LOL

[dilbert firestorm]

Originally Posted by The2Dogs

Federal government does not have the right to prohibit prostitution within the states..
What the federal government can do is make and enforce laws once the business crosses state lines such as transporting across the state lines for the purpose of prostitution.

What we have is a lot of federal dollars attempting to address "human trafficking" that includes those "trafficked" for the purpose of prostitution. This is a back handed way to harrass prostitutes by local governments as long as they can collect federal dollars to do it.

The reality is that there are people that are trafficking in the sex trade that are pimps or members of gangs, or other organized criminal enterprises. It would be nice if they wuld only target those that they know are trafficked and leave the rest alone but, they are not going to stop taking the money as long as they can.

The best way to reduce this is to avoid pimped traveling roadshows, "cantinas" , and the brothels that cater to non-english speaking tricks.

you're of course talking about the "mann act" that regulates prostitution between states.

[dilbert firestorm]

Originally Posted by ICU 812

How right you are! there is the continued erosion of the Frrst, Second, Forth and Fifth amendments and the rest of the Bill of rights.


The whole idea of the No-Fly List seems sensible, yet the implementation, as practiced, denies Due Process (Fifth Amendment) to those listed.

There is a movement to criminalize the expression of disbelief in the existence of "Global Warming" or "Climate Change". That threat to the First Amendment puts all Atheists and Agnostics at risk.

These examples are not an exaggeration. There are people who view the Constitution, and particularly The Bill of Rights, as impediments to governing.

I lack faith in the character of BOTH of the major candidates this election year. Disregarding the specific differences between Republican and Democrat or Conservative and Liberal; I do not feel that either has the strength of character to be the chief executive in these times. Both have shown that they will say or do whatever is expedient at the time without regard for any guiding principle, let alone the constitution.

I support Gary Johnson because I think he does. I presented his support for prostitution in the OP because that is appropriate for this venue.

No everybody . . . lighten up!

"C'mon . . .that was funny—I don't care who you are."
Larry The Cable Guy

Just so as you know that Gary Johnson is willing to use the power of the state to violate a person's religious belief against providing service to gay marriage couples.

The other issue is he is an open border proponent and free trade.

[CuteOldGuy]

Originally Posted by dilbert firestorm

Just so as you know that Gary Johnson is willing to use the power of the state to violate a person's religious belief against providing service to gay marriage couples.

The other issue is he is an open border proponent and free trade.

Yeah. I don't like that either, but when compared to Donald and Hillary, he's the obvious choice.

[ICU 812]

So there are enough pros and cons to go around.

Back to the original question: Who will be the best candidate for The Hobby and everyone in The HobbyWorld?