Tired of ads
on this site?

Become an expert in
pussy licking!
She'll Beg You For More!

Laughably Small Penis?
Enlarge it At Home
Using Just Your Hands!

Stay Hard as Steel!!!

Kneeling before the American Flag during the National Anthem...

Discussion Forum on Show It Off

Page #1

Pages:  #1   #2   #3   #4   #5   #6   #7  

Started by tecsan [Ignore] 14,Sep,20 02:27  other posts
Protests (peaceful that is) are ok, but kneeling before the American Flag???That is a disgrace and dishonor...Why do many want to dishonor our American Vets...Yes, I admit this is a free Country, so feel free overpaid athletes to disrespect it if that is how you feel...There are other ways to protest is all that I am trying to get across...Saddens me to see people kneeling before the Nations Flag while the National Anthem is playing...Actually, tearful... ༼☯﹏☯༽

New Comment       Rating: 0  


Comments:
By tecsan [Ignore] 20,Feb,21 02:14 other posts 
I know it is off topic, but please vote... /polls/2687.html


By Strongmember# [Ignore] 13,Oct,20 12:29 other posts 
I appreciate your expression of sadness tescan that such a maneuver dishonors veterans. My question is why do we believe that playing the Star Spangled Banner is an homage to veterans. It is a song written about the war of 1812. To be fair for the flip argument, at that time our nation was not free for black people. They were considered 3/5 of a human being until 1866. Regardless that history, the choice of a kneel is really a subtle protest, and could be about anything one chooses if upset with government. I doubt Kapernick or others are thinking of their protest as disrespect, but maybe they think it is the only way people will notice and recognize the injustices they perceive as occuring in the country. Framed that way it seems a noble gesture.
By tecsan [Ignore] 13,Oct,20 21:57 other posts 
I appreciate the fact you stated...Do you really think most Americans know that fact or even care...They care about what is happening now...Not what happened in 1812...You want a subtle protest, then go kneel at a high school game...Oh, the platform is not large enough for the silly propaganda...༼☯﹏☯༽
By Strongmember# [Ignore] 14,Oct,20 04:02 other posts 
You're right. He did not want a subtle protest. It was a bold move. Maybe he doesn't know about the anthem, but did you find out what he was protesting?
By tecsan [Ignore] 22,Dec,20 22:43 other posts 
Look at where he is now...No one wants anything to do with him...༼☯﹏☯༽
By #551147 14,Oct,20 18:55
Tecsan,

As soon as you got to the part where Strongmember# started with that 3/5th's a human crap, you should have stopped the argument there. It's misinformation CONSTANTLY used to minimize the greatness OR importance of our Constitution.

Being informed sure can go a LONG way!

Understanding the three-fifths compromise

The U.S. Constitution is a document that evolves with the times. Constitutional inadequacies and societal injustices are challenged, and social progress is the result. Instead of reverence for this brilliant document that ensures our rights, it is attacked by some as a severely flawed and even a racist contract.

One of the most widely used means to defame the Constitution is to manipulate perception of the three-fifths compromise. Agenda-driven academicians and committed ideologues routinely state the U.S. Constitution only recognizes blacks as three-fifths of a person. No context is given. This often-repeated falsehood foments disrespect of the Constitution and contempt for the founders who authored it.

The U.S. Constitution does not relegate blacks to “three-fifths of a person” status. Article I, Section 2 of the U.S. Constitution states: “Representatives and direct Taxes shall be apportioned among the several States which may be included within this Union, according to their respective Numbers, which shall be determined by adding to the whole Number of free Persons, including those bound to Service for a Term of Years, and excluding Indians not taxed, three fifths of all other Persons.” The “other Persons” were slaves.

The 1787 Constitutional Convention addressed the apportionment in the House of Representatives and the number of electoral votes each state would have in presidential elections based on a state’s population. The Southern states wanted to count the entire slave population. This would increase their number of members of Congress. The Northern delegates and others opposed to slavery wanted to count only free persons, including free blacks in the North and South.

Using the logic of the promoters of the “three-fifths of a person” interpretation, think of the constitutional ramification had the position of the Northern states and abolitionists prevailed. The three-fifths clause would have been omitted and possibly replaced with wording that stated “other Persons” would not be counted for apportionment. The Constitution, then, would be proclaiming slaves were not human at all (zero-fifths). This is an illogical conclusion and was certainly not the position of Northern delegates and abolitionists.

Counting the whole number of slaves benefited the Southern states and reinforced the institution of slavery. Minimizing the percentage of the slave population counted for apportionment reduced the political power of slaveholding states.

Denigration of the Constitution is not restricted to committed demagogues.

San Antonio’s U.S. District Judge Fred Biery addressed the Austin Bar Association on Law Day 2012. His speech focused on various social injustices in America’s past and how attorneys righted these wrongs. Biery used the example of then-recent Heisman Trophy winner Robert Griffin III. The judge asserted that in 1787 when the Constitution was ratified, Griffin’s “ancestors … were counted only as three-fifths of a human being.” Biery is alarmingly ignorant. Or worse, he is consumed with the need to promote and further a personal creed.

There are other troubling aspects of the lifetime judge’s declaration. Biery’s speech was published in San Antonio Lawyer after he addressed the bar association. Didn’t any of the attorneys at the meeting who actually understood the meaning of that portion of the Constitution advise Biery of his misrepresentation?

David Gans is the director of the Human Rights, Civil Rights and Citizenship Program at the Constitutional Accountability Center, a think tank and law firm. The Express-News published a column by him on constitutional requirements in the past year (“Count all people, as Constitution requires, March 10) in which he stated that “someone who was enslaved would be counted as three-fifths of a person” for the purpose of determining representation in Congress.

The magnitude of this constitutional illiteracy is not restricted to those on the political left. Former Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice routinely stated in her speeches, “In the original U.S. Constitution, I was only three-fifths of a person.”

In 1787, the founders were attempting to form a union and preserve the nascent United States. This imperfect compromise allowed for preservation of the republic while also confronting the moral and systemic evils of slavery. Erroneous and distorted interpretations of the Constitution only intensify the societal divide in America.

Hope that gives a better understanding how the Lib Left Loons consistently lie about shit.

🇺🇸 Protect The 1st & 2nd Amendments - TRUMP 2020 🇺🇸
By Strongmember# [Ignore] 14,Nov,20 01:31 other posts 
I hadn't noticed this reply before. I need to address it. While you technically have described the true intention of the 3/5 law, if we agree that black people were never technically 3/5 of human beings under law, then we must acknowledge that most of them at that time were not considered "free" thus they did not have rights granted to citizens in the original Constitution. I don't know if that interpretation of the Constitution resonates as more moral. I am not anti-constitution. I just know how to read it. Despite some of its content being the result of compromise and existing political realities of the time, that rationalization does not change the document. There were reasons why there was not only a 13th amendment but associated 14th and 15th amendments.
By tecsan [Ignore] 16,Feb,21 03:44 other posts 
Blacks were not considered free by democraps...Took a Republican to free them from the democraps...Right...
By TWOWARMTTS3 [Ignore] 14,Nov,20 10:04 other posts 
scorps
Yeah, yeah, yeah. In this argument some people go back to the beginnings of our republic or early wars. Some to the Civil War. Others to the 1960's or even now to the time the first knee touched the ground during a performance of the national anthem. It's all hooey. The truth is that you and your fellow bigots know you are wrong and you try to hide behind your amendment 1 and 2 to suit your arguments. There are good, honest cops out there. Most are decent and do a hard job to the best of their ability. Then there's the sons of bitches that "call a spade a spade". They think they wear a uniform to "keep them in line". Them n I g g e r s wont get away with anything.
Well, Black Lives Matter........to blacks. White lives matter to whites. And no one wants to see that there's something basically wrong with police departments that don't weed out the bigots in their ranks. I'm up to my eyeballs listening and reading about both sides of the argument. I rather see disrespectful people than murderers and their minimisers.
By dgraff [Ignore] 17,Nov,20 06:14 other posts 
Awwww little miss angel 😇 trying to single handedly save the world and for what let’s just get it over with and all kill each other the world is doomed
By TWOWARMTTS3 [Ignore] 17,Nov,20 07:35 other posts 
Not really. Most of the world is not worth saving. I mention it but I don't care if they kill each other. Dead black, dead cop. Trump didn't give a crap. I want to be the same
By tecsan [Ignore] 23,Nov,20 00:39 other posts 
That is a very sad statement...Most of the world not worth saving...You have to be kidding...༼☯﹏☯༽
By tecsan [Ignore] 17,Nov,20 23:38 other posts 
You have a good idea there...Just turn it on yourself...༼☯﹏☯༽
By #551147 17,Nov,20 23:42
LOL Who said you don't have a sense of humor...
By tecsan [Ignore] 25,Dec,20 04:37 other posts 
Wow think again...༼☯﹏☯༽
By tecsan [Ignore] 18,Feb,21 01:40 other posts 
Your friends go back to early years which opened it up for me...Pay attention...
By TWOWARMTTS3 [Ignore] 17,Nov,20 07:39 other posts 
I SEE OUR CONSTITUTIONAL SCHOLAR IS OUT QUOTING THE CONSTITUTION. HE DOES THAT WHEN IT SUITS HIS ARGUMENT. OTHER TIMES HE QUOTES THE MICKEY PAPERS.
ME? I SAY OUTLAW ALL GUNS AND COPS SHOULD STAY OUT OF BLACK AREAS.
By phart [Ignore] 17,Nov,20 09:33 other posts 
can't ban the guns unless the blacks stay in black areas and don't threaten the whites.
By TWOWARMTTS3 [Ignore] 17,Nov,20 11:10 other posts 
It's the other way around. Whites are threatening the blacks. Blacks should be given cash vouchers to buy guns and protect THEMSELVES from killer whites.
By tecsan [Ignore] 23,Nov,20 00:43 other posts 
I think we should get illegal guns off the street...Any criminal that wants one can get one...Look what a law abiding citizen goes through to buy a handgun...The focus should be on the illegal weapons...Wow, dems just want to get rid of them alltogether...༼☯﹏☯༽
"unless the blacks stay in black areas and don't threaten the whites"
That's a segregationists statement.
Another word for segregationist: racist!

How about not having black areas and white areas at all?
By phart [Ignore] 09,Feb,21 12:23 other posts 
It doesn't work. The goverment desegregated the schools.As soon as people grow up and become able to decide where they want to go,they go back to being with their own kind.It is natural.
We are different.Equal,but different.To try to erase that difference is ignorant.
By Ananas2xLekker [Ignore] 09,Feb,21 15:29 other posts 
Your wrong, they are in their black areas just because of poverty and you are in your white areas because you don't want black people around you.
I'm not saying there are no white or black areas in The Netherlands and it's true that minorities are much more concentrated in the poor areas and much less in the rich areas, but it's much more mixed here.
I live in a moderately priced row of houses and about 30% of families are first or second generation non-white immigrants. They are all doing well in their lives. They have good jobs, their children are doing their best in school or they are getting their careers well on the way. They are friendly, hospitable, social and trustworthy. As a matter of fact they make much better neighbors than the white people. In our whole street there are two white families we socialize with and the rest are just neighbors we greet on the street and maybe have some small talk with. They are all very private people.
The non white people are much more open and inviting. There are two families we socialize with regularly and two other families every now and then.
It feels like they just value community a lot more. I don't know if that is the same in the US and maybe it takes a lot more to fix mistrust between your people, but I think you're missing out from that separation.
By tecsan [Ignore] 18,Nov,20 02:20 other posts 
Oh hell did you really state that...I like you, but that statement is very debatable and you know it...That is the most ridiculous comment on here I have read...That is just plain stupid...༼☯﹏☯༽
By TWOWARMTTS3 [Ignore] 18,Nov,20 07:49 other posts 
And yet, it’s true. tecsan
By dgraff [Ignore] 18,Nov,20 05:25 other posts 
Hunny do you understand how many people would have to die if they came up MY mountain and tried to take My guns the numbers would be out of this world 🌎
By TWOWARMTTS3 [Ignore] 18,Nov,20 07:50 other posts 
Sacrifices must be made. If nessesary you go too
By Strongmember# [Ignore] 23,Nov,20 07:19 other posts 
@tescan there are many ways for seemingly anyone to put together an arsenal of serious weapons. I remember all the way back to Columbine when people wondered how those teens got all that stuff.. just drove to a gun show. I do have a fantasy that we could eliminate every gun from America.. I know super radical of me.. but there are way too many guns already out there for that to be a reasonable proposition. I understand the hunting sport.. but I think rules have been stretched when regular citizens can sport Military assault weapons. Alas people want them and its big business so probably won't change
By TWOWARMTTS3 [Ignore] 23,Nov,20 09:48 other posts 
@STRONGMEMBER@
It wont change until we change the head of the senate. Long guns for hunting is ok, Paramilitary rifles are are not. I believe we can change that
By phart [Ignore] 30,Nov,20 16:48 other posts 
Here is what some folks don't understand.This mask-pandemic=borderline socialist lockdown thing is a good indicator of enforcement.
When 20 men go out to take someones guns,and only 3 leave empty handed bleeding,it won't take long for folks paid to "enforce" the law will tell the chief to go fuck themselves.Besides the only bumpstocks and shit of that sort I ever saw,were owned by the folks that would be expected to go around and gather every one elses. That is because they know more about what is happening,could happen and probably will happen now that a dem is going back in the white house.
Getting rid the guns is a liberal wet dream that won't happen in this century.

Do something about the reason someone would want to kill you or someone else.That is much easier and doable.
By tecsan [Ignore] 24,Dec,20 22:35 other posts 
I agree with the very last statement, "cops should stay out of black areas" and see how long it takes them to call in the Police to curb the violence...
By SrCums [Ignore] 23,Nov,20 14:44 other posts 
Perfect morality is Godlike wisdom. In this physical world we will never reach this plateau because it is infinity, like picturing the mathematical value of PI(3.14 and so on)No matter how many decimal points you display you will never reach that limit. Mathematically, infinity does not exist however when you combine math and love for one another it creates a perfect sphere.
The constitution is an idea. An idea to achieve ever upward using compassion and unity as a tool to perform the image of God thus walking with him,her side by side as ONE. This is the idea. In this physical world of pain, suffering and egoism this limit will never be achieve but as we strive ever upward in attempt to form a perfect sphere so does our evolution of wisdom. The constitution was derived from Plato's Republic in order to define "justice" to achieve liberty for all. Doing what is right!
When we experience anger and hatred it takes this perfect sphere and dismantles it. Trump is the first president since Lincoln in an attempt to achieve unity through our hearts and compassion thus striving ever upward to reform the sphere of morality.

By Strongmember# [Ignore] 23,Nov,20 15:47 other posts 
I agreed with most of this. Though I believe Plato's preferred form of government was Aristocracy and not democracy, but we went with democracy, still going strong. With such a pure message I don't think you need to choose only 2 presidents, Lincoln and Trump, who have achieved unity ...toward greater morality.

Maybe you are just trying to clickbait me with this one. It does seem Trump united 72 or so million voters.. not positive most recent count.. even if we say its higher.. it seems like people are arguing now more than ever.. that this country is very divided politically and to a level of greater aggression than before, so I definitely do not see evidence of that piece of the ending.
By SrCums [Ignore] 23,Nov,20 19:58 other posts 
A rose is a rose! By any other name, smells just as sweet.

Shakespeare.

You are paranoid. First of all its closer to 80 million. That will be proven too since many votes were thrown in the garbage, shredded or burned..Luckily there is reserve databases.. I don't even know you... OR DO I?.. This raises my suspicions. as I said. You're critical thinking level is junior high proficiency. This is a debate stage here in forum. If you agree then great.. If not well that's fine too...
For your info,, the conservatives never argued about anything. Its the democrats that fund terror iincluding domestic terrorism which is a number of groups. It is the democrats using fake hoaxes, 25th amendment bullshit to say Trump is not fit to be president.. The people spoke.. as far whether they agree or not,, tell them I said "FUCK YOU"..Here in 2020 there is blatant fraud universally in the world. Here in the United States what is going on here is simple. Our country is being invaded by globalist's through economic channels. Traitors of the constitution are using voter fraud to form a coup... Nothing has been brought to court yet but it will...Since the left is trying hard to delay and postpone recounts and investigations it is not too hard to figure out they know what they did. We know what they did too.. Afterall,, if you are sure you won then why resist the recounts.. If they played straight up there is nothing to worry about... So why bitch????? Let the constitution and justice take its course..Why threaten to kill children if you don't get your way.. Sounds like terrorists to me. Again, tell the bastards I said "FUCK YOU"

By Strongmember# [Ignore] 23,Nov,20 22:00 other posts 
At first I only could see the Shakespeare quote. I was a bit perplexed and wondered what point you felt you made.

You should have left it there.

First I am paranoid. Then you ask if you know me. Then talk about suspicions. Unless that was your little dramatic segway into landing your first punchy dis, about how my critical thinking doesn't qualify me for varsity Model UN. Is that the proficiency you're going for, or too high? The most disheartening continuing result of these debates I feel is that positions are seeming to harden. I attempt to concede a point or admit when I do not know something with certainty, in an attempt to.. (what was that word? I'll use the verb form) "unify" the two sides of our nation. Maybe you perceive that as weak debating, but call me Old School I just really respect the achievements of Lincoln and Trump bringing the people together. I try to remember to use compassion.

As far as the remaining content of this post, I don't recall taking a strong viewpoint about whether conservatives or democrats were the ones who had argued. I don't think I made strong comments on the election either unless I alluded to it some other time in another post.

If I believed all those things you are saying I would also be outraged. Actually I am chill. I'm not bitching about the recounts. If it helps people feel more confident in the results then we can let this play out a bit longer. The Trump legal team can do all investigations and present their findings to the various courts.

I hope, as part of us should all hope, despite which candidate we want in office, that we don't find our election had more holes than Swiss cheese, because if it was that easily done, I would have to question how long it has been that way, if the election has potentially always been rigged. If that emerges later as the consensus conclusion I fear our democracy and the foundations of our nation will come into question. Perhaps more so around the world where we have been trying to promote democracy for many years. The Constitution's strong reputation might get dragged down as collateral, the document you earlier spoke of as a triumphant capture of an ambitious idea that set us on the correct path toward continuing to achieve better.

If all legal and other measures result in a vote count with Biden holding significant electoral and popular vote leads I hope that you might consider re-evaluating some of your assertions.

Some of the things you mentioned like Fake Hoaxes from the Democrats (is this Climate Change or Covid, both of which are undeniable truths), funding domestic terror ( perhaps this stems from George Soros, a significant campaign donor yes, but still just one man, gave some money to some groups involved in demos/riots, I don't know what your definition of Globalist is exactly, because we live in a very global world. Politicians around the world love to push the nationalism button to get people riled up. We are still a sovereignty with perhaps more freedoms than any other nation, the economy and information sharing already went global decades ago, some of it natural, some of it driven by soulless corporations that only selfishly seek more profit for shareholders by design. While Corporations won that Citizens United case for free speech to donate to elections, and they also have the power to do many things, they lack final accountability. Corporations can't go to prison. Corporations have interests in many elections. So do foreign governments. There are likely domestic Americans who would like to cheat the election. The question now remains, is it really that easy? If it is that easy, how can we be so sure who is behind it all, after-all if it is so easy why didn't many other groups try to cheat the election.

I can only speak for myself but I did not threaten to kill children, didn't think we should not recount or listen to Trump's legal team, but under the premise that the world is a mess and fraud is easy, it makes it difficult to put fraud claims behind hundreds of whistleblowers who were first politically motivated possibly to say they saw shady things, then people began offering them money to come forward. And now it has gone next level to Dominion as well.

This nation is very tense right now. We need to somehow move forward, but hopefully not this disparagingly divided, so I won't end my post with an 'FSociety' homage to Mr. Robot. I'm not an anarchist. Just someone who cares, tries to stay informed, tries to listen, and has a little too much available time this Sunday evening he is now realizing.
By SrCums [Ignore] 23,Nov,20 22:12 other posts 
You challenged me with money betting. I considered that rude
By Strongmember# [Ignore] 24,Nov,20 05:42 other posts 
Fair enough. Sorry.
By SrCums [Ignore] 23,Nov,20 22:17 other posts 
Globalists are to create a global socialistc totalitarian government. I'm really confused on how you don't undertand ths. The main objective is to destroy israel then to focus on Christians and I believe Islamism eventually.

Google globalistic regime.. then support your opinions.. Appears you don't know what these peope are trying to do
By Strongmember# [Ignore] 24,Nov,20 05:55 other posts 
I equally don't understand how you believe this. I got involved with some work things late and now tired. I actually have been working in Asia for 7 years. Back this year to visit family and stayed through the Covid lockdowns. I don't work in China, southeast Asia. I do think about things globally often for my work. Globalistic Regime could I guess mean different things but I suppose it is one particular theory. It will be a challenge if all the information comes from one collective that has assembled together this narrative, but I will give it a shot. From a preliminary read the desired goals seem to leave I suppose only 2 potential actors.. China and Russia. Only their beliefs would support social, totalitarian, no religion. However i cannot imagine them assimilating. Ok. I'll look into it.
By SrCums [Ignore] 24,Nov,20 06:07 other posts 
Do your homework before debating me aggressively. Know the facts.. that is what defines a good debater instead of annoying propaganda of he said she said.. Trump earned the presidency and it was taken away.. The whole world knows it,,, whether he wins or not.. I've just defined democracy for you and you come back saying it wasn't called that.. Well who cares? The shakespere quote is what it is.. take it or leave it.
...
By Strongmember# [Ignore] 01,Dec,20 23:53 other posts 
I do my best to discuss facts not opinion. Sometimes I insert opinion of course. As for democracy definition, is that because I discussed Plato? I was referencing material which can be checked. Plato argued at some point that only the intellectual elite should be allowed to govern, as opposed to democracy as we know it. Im not saying which was correct, just mentioned it.
--------------------------------------- added after 5 minutes

Btw I tried looking more into your globalist theory. I didn't want to respond without learning more. However, because I don't know about your particular theory does not mean I don't know about global economics and politics. This is actually my educational background and correlates with much of my career learning. If you want to list our sources from now on we can. I have no ill intent here. I only believe I am correct and hope to influence people to believe me according to my perceived knowledge
By SrCums [Ignore] 24,Nov,20 05:57 other posts 
You're the one making accusations, not me. You challenge me with hard earned money then when I call you out you say this stupid crap...Democrats threatened children of poll certifiers exposing names and addresses... Before you bullshit here find facts and do some research. I'm sick of retracting bullshit. You want to debate, then debate but don't include shit you haven't researched or just plain out right lying.. That's rude too and I'm smarter than that.
Look,, I gave my analogy on democracy and morality. It wasn't directed at you, just my analysis.. You are paranoid because you accused me of saying it was to trigger you.. THAT'S PARANOID so shut up. Your writing is clearly the same with Huxley999, FatPig-BElla , hotpussy and so many others attacking me with my religion.. I assert you are not who you say you are.
By Strongmember# [Ignore] 01,Dec,20 23:50 other posts 
I called it clickbait because i felt the need to debate it. I did not mean it in a paranoid way, I was actually wondering if you cleverly wrote it to attract more debators.

Sorry I was busy a few days. The bet I intended to be something that would not affect anyone financially, but was gauging confidence. It was about who would end up in the white house late January. It is still trending my way but I don't back it up with nothing. In a court of law the burden of proof for this major claim of major election fraud is on the accusers. All around the country the court cases are being lost, even when Trump appointed judges are involved.

Btw I don't know who those other people are and I don't think I wrote anythig about your religion...
--------------------------------------- added after 4 minutes

To be clear I respect everyone's religious beliefs and attacking that is not my style
By tecsan [Ignore] 14,Oct,20 03:57 other posts 
I would kiss your ass if Kaepernick could even tell me who wrote the national anthem...Hmmm...A thinker for you maybe...༼☯﹏☯༽
By TWOWARMTTS3 [Ignore] 14,Oct,20 14:25 other posts 
Francis Scott Key was the author and the music was popular for othe reasons but.it was not until 1932 that it was officially named our anthem. So, while waiting for prohibition to end you could take a knee
--------------------------------------- added after 80 seconds

And when you come down to it. ANY LIFE is worth more than some silly piece of music.
By tecsan [Ignore] 18,Oct,20 01:13 other posts 
If I ever kneel during the national anthem...I will be dead and prone or supine...༼☯﹏☯༽
By tecsan [Ignore] 18,Nov,20 02:24 other posts 
Good google search there...I would have believed it until you started stating facts...Dont google it and state the facts as you see them on google...Hell, I knew the answer, but not as detailed as your google answer...༼☯﹏☯༽
By tecsan [Ignore] 23,Nov,20 00:45 other posts 
By the way would kiss your ass if he could not also...༼☯﹏☯༽
By ANGEL1227! [Ignore] 19,Nov,20 16:15 other posts 
strongmember#
sorry you had that happen willy, to me from your pics, your dick when it is standing upright, seems very normal in size and nothing to be mournful about, being shy is awkward, I once was too - I guarantee if you "show hard for blow" standing at a urinal, nobody will embarrass you - heck they might grab it and jerk you off or haul you into a stall and suck you dry
By tecsan [Ignore] 26,Nov,20 02:26 other posts 
Like I have stated, just using a large platform to get his stupid message across...Look at him now...༼☯﹏☯༽
By tecsan [Ignore] 11,Dec,20 23:12 other posts 
Maybe keapernick has time to think about his washed up career now...༼☯﹏☯༽
By TWOWARMTTS3 [Ignore] 16,Dec,20 18:22 other posts 
Women After Soldier’s Killing by fellow soldiers.

Women in the military say the horrific killing of Army Specialist Vanessa Guillen has swept the nation, galvanizing even civilians to the cause.


only registered users can see external links

I wonder if kneeling for this soldier is allowed?
By tecsan [Ignore] 21,Dec,20 03:27 other posts 
Because it is the National Anthem...Believe most veterans that can stand and salute the flag during the playing of it will agree with me...As for 1812, I will tell you the same as I was told about the past...Remember who set slaves free??? Was it a dem or a rep...???I was told the past is in the past...༼☯﹏☯༽
By TWOWARMTTS3 [Ignore] 24,Dec,20 10:15 other posts 
Should I be offended when vets stand for the anthem?


New Comment   Go to top

Pages:  #1   #2   #3   #4   #5   #6   #7  



Show It Off