Oh sweet zombie Jebus….Boebert was a hooker in Colorado and had multiple abortions. Her weak denials are less believable than Cawthorn’s, and the evidence is her “sugar daddy meets.com” page with provocative photos of her looking for “pay to play” dates, and an unreported $70000 “donation” from Ted Cruise after her sugar daddy introduced them and she visited Ted in Texas (when she was still an “unlicensed escort”).

The investigators that made this public have BEGGED her to sue them so they can depose her under oath about these charges. She’s toast.

This on top of the revelation recently that her mileage fraud, where she was reimbursed for her claim that she drove almost 40000 miles in a few months campaigning in Colorado, was perpetrated because she was bankrupt and needed $20000 to save her family restaurant (she hadn’t been paying taxes and the state was going to foreclose on her), almost exactly the amount she was overpaid for her fake travel expenses. Now under investigation.

And let’s not forget she was with her husband when he exposed his penis to two 15 year old girls in a bowling alley and defended him over it, making her complicit in child sex abuse.

This is the Trumpist heroine, his “best people”. Oof.

I kept hoping he would pick up Caddy Shack Gopher for a play date with Punxsutawney Phil.
*quality

Bill and Steve's post-apocalyptic play date. Where is everybody?

OK,

So I don't promote or tolerate these kind of tantrums -at all.
But that being said. I really feel bad for this kid.

It seems kids are beginning with computers from the time they learn to click the mouse. It's what they know as a constant reality in their world. They are are being raised on it - it's like air. Their brains are being programed to exist almost symbiotically with the computer. When they are left unchecked, separating them can be mentally traumatic for them.

This kid is fairly young. It's almost like it's an animal response. It's up to parents to keep this type of tool from kids and monitor it's use. It's harder than it looks. I know If I separated my child from his computer, he wouldn't act like this, but I interact with him and we set limits on a regular basis. Now if I flat, went in and deleted his user ID and everything he had, ya, he'd be undeniably upset. Wouldn't you?

Only you and I have relationships outside of the computer world (I hope) so we all have something to fall back on partly because some of us remember not having the computer to start with.

Again, I don't condone the reaction, but I do understand it and I can't help blaming the world around us for the situation we are in. Computer games and websites are, in their design, addictive, they are meant to be, that's how they are designed. That's how they make their money.

It's not the child's responsibility to separate and educate himself against the onslaught of techno. His parents, his family, teachers and friends should get in on the solution.Us parents are a huge part of the problem. Kids don't even go outside to play anymore unless the parents set up a "Play Date" or a "Hang Out". Remember when we used to go outside and just knock on a door and say can Johny come out and play?" That doesn't happen any more. Kids just sit there on the computer waiting for the parents to initiate play time.


OK, I'll end now, but you see my point right...??

>> ^longde:

The attached article says in the comments that she does have electricity.
I don't have a TV at my house. And we don't let our toddler use any electronics. What's wrong with a shelf full of books and games?
>> ^Shepppard:
I've just got too many questions about this.
Does she still go to school?
Does the kid go to school?
Does she work?
If she does go to school or work, what happens to the kid when she's gone?
(as stated) whose land is she on?
Honestly, I get it. She's doesn't want to conform to the "ideal" form of life. But how far can you go without upsetting your child?
If it were just her, yeah, I'd be fine with it. Novel concept, but no electricity? Granted, you don't need a t.v., you don't need a computer, but it almost seems like the child is going to be oddly out of place later in life because she's being denied those things now.
Who knows, maybe during the day when the kid is hopefully with a babysitter or something she gets her fix.. but her talk of moving the "house" to a barge and just sailing.. Honestly, it's sounding like she's being more selifish then anything.
Edit: it says in the linked story that she's a Babysitter (thus why the other children are there).
Now I'm curious if she's using whatever credentials she went to school for and that's a side job, or if that's her only job.



Toddler to me sounds like a very young child, that's different then one that seems to be 8-10. She can obviously read, But denying your child anything, specifically things that are considered staples of life in the modern age seems like it's just going to either A) Give them a disadvantage later in life, or B) The child will start to harbour resentment towards the parents for not being given something that could have been provided.

However, I'll also assume that your child goes on play-dates? And if they ARE old enough to go to school, then they'll learn all about computers and technology there.

The one we see in the video however doesn't seem to go to school, and therefore is either going to be home-schooled, or no schooled (Just basically learns what mommy sees fit to teach). And when she's older, that's going to be a serious disadvantage.

>> ^Ornthoron:

You are right, there are many decisions parents make that will affect a person for life. Some are good and some are bad. I am for those that are good and against those that are bad. For instance, I am also opposed to parents sending their kids to religious schools that teach the kids only one narrow way to look at the world, because I believe they will suffer for it later in life.
For some decisions it is easy to separate between what's bad for the child long-term and what's good. In other cases it is not so clear cut (no pun intended). It is not easy being a parent, and everyone will make wrong decisions once in a while.
However, when it comes to male (and female) circumcision, where there are miniscule to none positive effects and some very real negative effects, the decision should be easy. We don't allow parents to perform any other type of plastic surgery on infants, so why should this be allowed? Many other religious views can be overruled by the state if it's in the best interest of a person too young to make decisions for themselves.
>> ^VoodooV:
There are thousands of PERMANENT decisions a parent makes for their child without their consent that cannot be undone. where is your outrage for the parents choosing which pre-school to send their kids to? which doctor to go to? Do you feed them this formula or that formula. Do we set up a play date with little this group of kids or that group of kids. To breast feed or not to breast feed.


Fortunately for the rest of the world, you don't get to judge, oh arbiter of what is good and bad. This reinforces why I'm an independent. Both left and right have their lunatic fringe. and arbitrating circumcision is definitely lunatic.

and xxovercast, I never said YOU were pro-ban. nice try though. This perfectly demonstrates the hypocrisy of both left and right. pro-choice for certain things....not so much other things. You don't get to cherry pick what choices you approve of and which ones you don't. It's all ok or none of it is.

As I have repeatedly stated, Unless you can show that the majority of those who have had circumcision without consent are under some sort of significant duress or their lives are significantly been infringed upon. You've got nothing.

You are right, there are many decisions parents make that will affect a person for life. Some are good and some are bad. I am for those that are good and against those that are bad. For instance, I am also opposed to parents sending their kids to religious schools that teach the kids only one narrow way to look at the world, because I believe they will suffer for it later in life.

For some decisions it is easy to separate between what's bad for the child long-term and what's good. In other cases it is not so clear cut (no pun intended). It is not easy being a parent, and everyone will make wrong decisions once in a while.

However, when it comes to male (and female) circumcision, where there are miniscule to none positive effects and some very real negative effects, the decision should be easy. We don't allow parents to perform any other type of plastic surgery on infants, so why should this be allowed? Many other religious views can be overruled by the state if it's in the best interest of a person too young to make decisions for themselves.

>> ^VoodooV:
There are thousands of PERMANENT decisions a parent makes for their child without their consent that cannot be undone. where is your outrage for the parents choosing which pre-school to send their kids to? which doctor to go to? Do you feed them this formula or that formula. Do we set up a play date with little this group of kids or that group of kids. To breast feed or not to breast feed.

>> ^xxovercastxx:

>> ^VoodooV:
splitting hairs to fit your agenda and you know it.
but even if I were to concede that. There are thousands of PERMANENT decisions a parent makes for their child without their consent that cannot be undone. where is your outrage for the parents choosing which pre-school to send their kids to? which doctor to go to? Do you feed them this formula or that formula. Do we set up a play date with little this group of kids or that group of kids. To breast feed or not to breast feed.
You've lost perspective. You're focusing on this one single issue without considering the wider implications here. Separation of church and state swings BOTH ways. Church is not supposed to interfere with the state, State doesn't interfere with church. And for many, circumcision is religious issue. The people who have remorse over their circumcision are in the minority, when that changes, give me a call. You haven't sufficiently proven that those who have received circumcisions without their consent are significantly harmed or that their quality of life is lowered in any measurable way. It's issue only because a vocal minority have made it an issue.
If you're pro-choice, guess what...that means supporting choices you don't always approve of. Deal with it. Freedom is a bitch, ain't it.

You're making a lot of assumptions about me; foremost, that I have an agenda and subsequently, that you know the details of said agenda.
Also, you can't open with a coup de grâce; you've got to inflict some wounds first. To the matter at hand.
Every day more and more people are learning that circumcision is an archaic practice that is about as likely to have positive effects as it is to have negative effects. Routine circumcision is no longer recommended by pediatric associations and some are even beginning to come out against it.
There is no good reason to perform it routinely and new parents should be taught why. That's my agenda.


you just demonstrated why a ban is stupid and unnecessary. If circumcision is declining on it's own. Why is it necessary to ban it?

You haven't made ANY case for why gov't should get involved, quite the opposite in fact. You haven't refuted ANY of my arguments. It simply not being necessary is not reason enough to ban it. You simply have NOT made your case....at all. This is a perfect example of less is more when it comes to laws.

If you don't like it, you have the freedom to not do it...allow others the same freedom, thank you.

>> ^VoodooV:

splitting hairs to fit your agenda and you know it.
but even if I were to concede that. There are thousands of PERMANENT decisions a parent makes for their child without their consent that cannot be undone. where is your outrage for the parents choosing which pre-school to send their kids to? which doctor to go to? Do you feed them this formula or that formula. Do we set up a play date with little this group of kids or that group of kids. To breast feed or not to breast feed.
You've lost perspective. You're focusing on this one single issue without considering the wider implications here. Separation of church and state swings BOTH ways. Church is not supposed to interfere with the state, State doesn't interfere with church. And for many, circumcision is religious issue. The people who have remorse over their circumcision are in the minority, when that changes, give me a call. You haven't sufficiently proven that those who have received circumcisions without their consent are significantly harmed or that their quality of life is lowered in any measurable way. It's issue only because a vocal minority have made it an issue.
If you're pro-choice, guess what...that means supporting choices you don't always approve of. Deal with it. Freedom is a bitch, ain't it.


You're making a lot of assumptions about me; foremost, that I have an agenda and subsequently, that you know the details of said agenda.

Also, you can't open with a coup de grâce; you've got to inflict some wounds first. To the matter at hand.

Every day more and more people are learning that circumcision is an archaic practice that is about as likely to have positive effects as it is to have negative effects. Routine circumcision is no longer recommended by pediatric associations and some are even beginning to come out against it.

There is no good reason to perform it routinely and new parents should be taught why. That's my agenda.

>> ^xxovercastxx:

>> ^VoodooV:
This is where I have to channel QM a bit.
If it's ok to choose to kill your unborn baby without it's consent, it's certainly OK to choose to cut a tiny portion of his wang off without his consent.

False equivalency. A baby is a person; a fetus is not.


splitting hairs to fit your agenda and you know it.

but even if I were to concede that. There are thousands of PERMANENT decisions a parent makes for their child without their consent that cannot be undone. where is your outrage for the parents choosing which pre-school to send their kids to? which doctor to go to? Do you feed them this formula or that formula. Do we set up a play date with little this group of kids or that group of kids. To breast feed or not to breast feed.

You've lost perspective. You're focusing on this one single issue without considering the wider implications here. Separation of church and state swings BOTH ways. Church is not supposed to interfere with the state, State doesn't interfere with church. And for many, circumcision is religious issue. The people who have remorse over their circumcision are in the minority, when that changes, give me a call. You haven't sufficiently proven that those who have received circumcisions without their consent are significantly harmed or that their quality of life is lowered in any measurable way. It's issue only because a vocal minority have made it an issue.

If you're pro-choice, guess what...that means supporting choices you don't always approve of. Deal with it. Freedom is a bitch, ain't it.

My mom is a real nice person, so she said, "Aw, that poor little asshole needs a friend, so downvote it so he won't feel so lonely. Don't worry, I won't make you have a play date with the fucking cunt."
In reply to this comment by rottenseed:
That wonder woman is hott.

Hey so now you're downvoting the same videos as I am because you think it'll make you look cool? Well let me tell you something, Mr. Nothing I do is "cool" or "hip" or "in" or "down"...I'm a bad influence. I was the kid you used to hang out with as a kid that would cause your mom to say something like "Don't hang out with him, Jon, that kid's a fucking cunt" and cause my mom say things like "Marshall, you're a fucking cunt".

I had more sophisticated play-dates when I was 4. The fact that someone thought this needed credits and included the outtakes is pretty infantile, but I guess that was the point of all this. Next time just throw the camera into traffic, it will be more entertaining.