A Thigh Party
July 10th, 2009 • Related • Filed Under
By Delaware Dem
Um, yeah. Politicians like bear hugs, handshakes, gripping your upper arm, patting you on the back, but …. inner thigh? Lap dancers in strip clubs don’t place their hand on your inner thigh for the entire evening, not that I would know anything about that.
If that unnamed Republican Senator is anyone but Larry “Wide Stance” Craig…
Comment by cassandra_m on 10 July 2009 at 7:05 pm:
Lindsey Graham. The Thigh Groper (the Thigh Whisperer?)– bet you money……
Comment by jason330 on 10 July 2009 at 7:29 pm:
You mean it is wrong for me to put my hand on the inner thigh of a colleague?
I’ll have to commit that to memory prior to the next DL staff meeting.
Comment by Delaware republican on 10 July 2009 at 7:56 pm:
Ted Kennedy would be the better reference.
Comment by Rhymes With Right on 10 July 2009 at 9:35 pm:
My guess? Arlen Specter. (talk about something that would give one nightmares)
Comment by Unstable Isotope on 10 July 2009 at 10:44 pm:
I didn’t know David Brooks was so irresistible.
Comment by Rhymes With Right on 10 July 2009 at 11:19 pm:
I suppose we could go back a few years for a candidate — Strom Thurmond.
Comment by anonone on 10 July 2009 at 11:44 pm:
More fun stuff from Rhymey With Whitey’s private U.S. apartheid wet dream:
“Two gay men kicked out of Chico’s Tacos restaurant for kissing
EL PASO — Two gay men kissed at a Chico’s Tacos restaurant, prompting guards to eject them and a police officer to endorse their ouster.
Even happened in Rhymey’s home state.
http://www.elpasotimes.com/ci_12790543
Comment by Rhymes With Right on 11 July 2009 at 12:13 am:
Might shock you to learn that while I don’t believe it should be illegal, I do believe that such things are wrong.
Besides, anonone — what about the owner’s “right to choose”?
Comment by anonone on 11 July 2009 at 9:06 am:
Fortunately, Rhymes With Spigot, there is no “owners right to choose” whether or not to discriminate anymore than there is an “owners right” to choose to own slaves anymore.
The “owner’s right to choose” is to choose whether or not to run his or her business in a way that complies with federal anti-discrimination and civil rights laws. If they don’t want to do that, than they can “choose” not to open or stay in business.
And, in your public vs private argument, you ignore the fact that all businesses use public infrastructure (roads, transportation, sanitation, security, etc.) purchased and maintained by taxpayers of all colors and shapes.
Your so-called “right to choose” argument when it comes to a “right to choose” whether or not to discriminate was lost decades ago in this country. Give it up.
Comment by Rhymes With Right on 11 July 2009 at 9:11 am:
you ignore the fact that all businesses use public infrastructure (roads, transportation, sanitation, security, etc.)
Thank you, anonone, for supplying an argument that can be used to ban abortion!
Comment by Rhymes With Right on 11 July 2009 at 9:14 am:
And anonone, there is a fundamental difference between owning a human being (a violation of the fundamental human right to be free) and exercising one’s right to determine with whom one will do business and on what terms.
Comment by anonone on 11 July 2009 at 9:24 am:
Rhymey,
Fail. Abortions are legal services for businesses to offer. Fetuses don’t pay taxes.
The “right to choose” is just the old state’s rights argument for slavery. Fail again.
There is no “right to determine with whom one will do business and on what terms,” and there never was. Fail again.