Jump to content

BSR

Members
  • Content Count

    4,392
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

2,611 Excellent

3 Followers

About BSR

  • Rank
    Marquess

Recent Profile Visitors

The recent visitors block is disabled and is not being shown to other users.

  1. Apparently you & I view the escort-client relationship very differently. I'm a bit baffled by your statement "It is personal." How? The escort provides a service; the client pays him for that service. Granted, the escort provides physical intimacy and sometimes sessions involve emotional intimacy as well, but in the end, if you're paying for the escort's services, it's business. It was nice of the OP to help the escort out with his grad school essays, but unless the OP stated up front he expected compensation for his help, then all the escort owes him is a heartfelt thank you. Gr
  2. I don't understand why loyal, longtime clients feel that they should be grandfathered in at the old rate. Businesses increase their prices all the time. As a regular, longtime customer at some places, I can't say that I'm happy about the increases, but I don't expect the business to make an exception for me either. As for this escort's "inflated" rate, his recent rate increase is only "inflated" if not enough clients are willing to pay it. If he's getting the amount of business he wants at the higher rate, then it's not inflated -- it's right for the market. If he's not getting enough
  3. The GOP's total fail on this issue baffles me. Polling repeatedly shows that the Republicans' failure to come up with any sort of healthcare plan is killing them with voters. Voters would have even viewed a bad GOP plan more favorably than no plan at all. Yet the brilliant *cough* Paul Ryan, Mitch McConnell & Donald Trump all just stood there like a deer in the headlights. Wow, some leadership. Hopefully the 2024 crop of candidates straighten this out. At least the likes of Ron DeSantis & Josh Hawley are working with a helluva lot more intellectual horsepower. Whether they h
  4. Interesting ... you can dig up my posts from 10 years ago, but when I challenge you to find just one butwhatabout in response to the accusations against Trump, you got bupkus. In this thread, you accuse me of what you yourself are guilty of - a whataboutism. You are deeply embarrassed by leftists' love of serial rapist Bill Clinton, and you have no defense for the American Left's decades of protecting, excusing, defending , and coddling of the serial rapist. So you bring up the accusations against Trump to deflect, even throwing in non sequiturs about Naomi Osaka & Matthew Shepard in a
  5. Indeed, dishonesty abounds when gun-grabbers try to "prove" their point. Gun-grabbers love to point to the success of Australia's gun ban+confiscation while neglecting to note a couple of other trends that debunk that "success." As John Lott writes, "Prior to 1996, there was already a clear downward [trend] in firearm homicides, and this pattern continued after the buyback. It is hence difficult to link the decline to the buyback." Lott also notes, "Again, as with suicides, both non-firearm and firearm homicides fell by similar amounts. In fact, the trend in non-firearms homicides shows a
  6. I try to avoid butwhataboutisms. I leave that non-argument to you leftists. But if you can dig up a time or few that I responded to the accusations against Trump with butwhatabout, feel free to throw it in my face. You seem to enjoy digging up my old posts -- have at it! Hillary enabled her serial rapist husband when the accusations started popping up from a number of women during the serial rapist's 2nd term. She publicly dismissed them as "garbage" and ordered her staff to dig up dirt on them in order to destroy them. If that's not enabling, then nothing is. By the way, during
  7. There is no love more pure than the American Left's love for their favorite serial rapist and favorite rape enabler.
  8. And only law-abiding Americans obey gun control. If a person willingly violates the laws against murder, rape, armed robbery, and drug trafficking, he couldn't care less about gun control. Yet gun control+confiscation will somehow magically transform a nation of unarmed law-abiders and armed-to-the-teeth criminals into a utopia free of all gun violence ... uh huh.
  9. I am puzzled by the anti-gunners' argument that more guns mean more gun deaths when we have vastly more guns today than 30 years ago yet violent crime is substantially lower. John Lott documents the trends in great detail in his book More Guns, Less Crime, a book I'm sure not a single gun-hater on this board will ever bother to read. Even if more guns = more violent crime were true, I have 2 questions: 1. How do you confiscate guns from law-abiding Americans in light of the 2nd Amendment? My guess is that the gun-grabbers would simply have to ignore the 2nd Amendment, but maybe the
  10. My dream scenario is that Novak wins on Sunday for Slam #19, then defends his Wimbledon title in a few weeks for #20. That way, the Big 3 all go into the US Open with 20 apiece, plus Novak will be chasing the elusive calendar year Grand Slam. Oh, it would be glorious!
  11. Wow, just the same talking points over & over again. If the enormous number of guns were the problem, then Wyoming would be the murder capital of the country, but its murder rate is 43rd out of 50 states. By the way, to give an idea of just how armed to the teeth they are in Wyoming, the state has 228 firearms per 1,000 population. The 2nd most guns per capita state is New Hampshire, with just 47 firearms per thousand. The root causes of most gun violence are socioeconomic: poverty, single motherhood, shit government schools, narcotrafficking. All the gun control in the world won'
  12. Novak's win today changes the landscape of the Slam race -- currently Roger at 20, Rafa at 20, Novak at 18. Mind you, Novak still has to win the final, but if he does, that puts him just one behind Roger & Rafa. So instead of the rather sizable gap of 3 Slams between Rafa & Novak that just about everyone had penciled in, Novak is just one back, and he's the favorite at Wimbledon. Rafa was 105-2 at Roland Garros going into today's match, with an unreal 13-0 record in semifinals (he's also undefeated in the 13 finals he's played). So Novak hands Rafa his first loss in a semifinal
  13. You can drink alcohol in public only on the Strip from the Strat to Mandalay Bay and in the pedestrian section of Fremont Street. Outside of those two zones, drinking in public is illegal. Nevada is an open-carry state, which means you don't need a permit of any sort to carry a firearm in plain view. You need a permit only for concealed carry. You do occasionally see a guy with a holstered gun. I'll admit it took some getting used to at first, but it no longer fazes me. I have never seen any link between gun violence & open carry. If you have evidence that open carry increases the r
  14. If gun control solves all the problems of gun violence, then comparing states vs. cities shouldn't matter. And if the availability of guns causes higher rates of gun violence, as @syncargues, then armed-to-the-teeth Wyoming should have by far the highest rate of gun violence in the nation. It looks like 2017 might be an aberration for Huntington WV. In 2006 the murder rate per 100K for Huntington was zero because there wasn't a single murder in the city of 45,000. For 2007 & 2016 it was 6.2 (3 murders those years), and for 2019 it was 8.8 (4 murders). Don't ask me what happened in
  15. In 2018, the murder rate per 100,000 population in West Virginia was 3.71. In armed to the teeth Wyoming, it was 2.25. In stark contrast, Washington DC with all its beautifully effective gun control lead the nation with 22.78 murders per 100K, almost double the rate of the highest state. Gosh, and leftists keep insisting that gun control will solve all our problems.
×
×
  • Create New...