Do All Men Have Wondering Eyes?

Status
Not open for further replies.
if she walked past me i'd probably look too...
 
Looking at a person's eyes or hair is not the same as staring at her behind or breasts like a salvating dog, I think that is an important distiction,....
Click to expand...
The difference between looking and staring is certainly an important distinction. Which is he doing in this photo? How can you tell?

Which body parts are open for appreciation? Just hair and eyes? Are those the only ones presented for display?
... Besides your GF is looking at what is on the menu, clearly a 16 year old girl is not.
Click to expand...
A woman on a diet will still look at somebody else's dessert.

Besides, this 16-year-old business is BS. Can you tell from that photo that the girl is 16?
-harry
 
dmccormack said:
Again -- just because a discussion revolves around a political figure doesn't make the discussion political.
Click to expand...

Um, when the conversation "revolves around" the "example" set by, the leadership qualities of, standards adhered to in public by, and how the political figure is "representing" the country, uh... If that's not "political", what is?

Like I said: Open-and-shut.
 
What a fine post to remind me of our country's puritanical roots :rolleyes:

I'd look too if I were him -- and I'd understand that certain prudes in our country would protest.

ALL eyes are on him ALL the time -- and they're gonna catch his looking around eventually and try to make something of it. The worst thing he can do as the most powerful man on earth is surely not look at some tail. I'd be happy with him even pinching that behind if he solved some of our more complex problems while doing it.

Isn't "eyeing the goods" what got YOU your daughters in the first place? :D Decorum is for the queen of England. Let the brother get his eyeful.

$0.02
 
roncachamp said:
Dreweling? Many men have wandering eyes, few men wonder enough.

Obama may appear lecherous in the still image, in the video it's a non-event.
Click to expand...

Thank you, Steven. From the outset of this thread I've questioned whether the title should have been "wandering" and not "wondering." Re "spin," my observation is to the extent of incorrect spelling, improper use of the "there/their/they're" terms, and improper punctuation of thoughts expressed throughout the exchanges of opinions. But enough of that; with our 3rd consecutive day of sunshine -- 23 days of rain in June and eight in July -- it's time to get the boat into the water.

HR
 
Geico266 said:
Looking at a person's eyes or hair is not the same as staring at her behind or breasts like a salvating dog, I think that is an important distiction,...... hence the thread. Besides your GF is looking at what is on the menu, clearly a 16 year old girl is not.
Click to expand...


Actually in many states she would be! :p

As far as looking, you betcha. Sorry but call me a neaderthal but an attractive woman stirs something "primal" in me, and most men I know and YES we will be looking, and thinking!
 
ReverendSlappy said:
Um, when the conversation "revolves around" the "example" set by, the leadership qualities of, standards adhered to in public by, and how the political figure is "representing" the country, uh... If that's not "political", what is?

Like I said: Open-and-shut.
Click to expand...

I'll defer to your expertise in all things spin as I am an Opt-Out.


(But my sneaking suspicion is that only select political damsels in distress are afforded such protection)
 
Actual I think the photo should be in the "Post a caption thread" and France's President Nicolas Sarkozy is taking a good look as well.
 
dmccormack said:
Again -- just because a discussion revolves around a political figure doesn't make the discussion political.
Click to expand...

Except this thread and the OP do not just revolve around a political figure, the subject of the thread is mean to about how such a figure should act.

Just a few posts ago you too made the connection that the OP intended. That was to discuss the political role and responsibilities of a president and furthermore to define what actions are non-presidential.

dmccormack said:
Again -- I disagree with the premise.

But I agree that those in positions of power have additional responsibilities -- including the Governor of South Carolina.
Click to expand...
 
Did anyone else think of 'Twas the Night Before Christmas when they read the title "Then what to my wondering eyes did appear..."
 
dmccormack said:
(But my sneaking suspicion is that only select political damsels in distress are afforded such protection)
Click to expand...

And your "suspicion" -- in addition to the fact that it's clearly not "sneaking" -- couldn't be more incorrect: Irrespective of the partisan affiliation of the political figure (to use your term) in question, talking about their "leadership", the "example" they set, how they "represent" the country -- especially in foreign relations -- and the "standards" one believes they should live up to is, um, like, you know, almost the definition of political discussion, which is SZ. Period.

I'm not sure what's unclear about that. :dunno:
 
smigaldi said:
Except this thread and the OP do not just revolve around a political figure, the subject of the thread is mean to about how such a figure should act.

Just a few posts ago you too made the connection that the OP intended. That was to discuss the political role and responsibilities of a president and furthermore to define what actions are non-presidential.
Click to expand...

Exactly. The OP didn't bring up his NCAA Tournament picks. Or his choice in shoes. Or his freaking golf swing. He brought up things like the kind of "example" he should set, the "standards" he should adhere to, and how he is "representing" the country to other nations. It doesn't take much in the way of intellectual honesty to see and admit the clear-as-day difference there.

And speaking of "doth protest too much", trying to paint this whole thing as anything other than political in nature just serves to confirm the fact that it is. :dunno:
 
Wait, there have been 57 posts on this thread in 2 hours?

Come on, people, let's talk about something important. You know, like airplanes.
 
Exhibit A for why SZ should be avoided at all costs. Or canned.

ReverendSlappy said:
Exactly. The OP didn't bring up his NCAA Tournament picks. Or his choice in shoes. Or his freaking golf swing. He brought up things like the kind of "example" he should set, the "standards" he should adhere to, and how he is "representing" the country to other nations. It doesn't take much in the way of intellectual honesty to see and admit the clear-as-day difference there.

And speaking of "doth protest too much", trying to paint this whole thing as anything other than political in nature just serves to confirm the fact that it is. :dunno:
Click to expand...
 
wabower said:
Exhibit A for why SZ should be avoided at all costs. Or canned.
Click to expand...
I don't understand what you are pointing to. If anything post #1 is the reason that some people were not able to survive in a section of the board that required you to be able to reason above the HS level. So instead some people post political posts in the HT section in order to avoid the proper criticism that their subject matter would warrant. Then they scream how awful the SZ is. This will illicit a few people who have never been in the SZ to also chime in with how awful the SZ is, even though they have no first hand experience but rely on what they heard form the people who could not hack in the SZ. This was a recently banned member of PoA main way of trying to score political points.

Geico does post in the SZ and often times makes good arguments. But I think in this case he realized that the subject of his own post was at best a juvenile attempt to score some cheap political hay and he was frightened of the responses that he would have gotten in the SZ had he made it a serious post there. Now had he posted it there as humor, which does happen, it would have gotten a different response. As an example there is a post in the SZ right now on naming of one's Blackberry using a play on Marion Berry's name and his recent repeat drug issue. That is a funny thread and properly categorized. In addition the subject matter is presented in a way to not score cheap political hay but instead uses satire to illustrate a political point.
 
Last edited:
smigaldi said:
Except this thread and the OP do not just revolve around a political figure, the subject of the thread is mean to about how such a figure should act.

Just a few posts ago you too made the connection that the OP intended. That was to discuss the political role and responsibilities of a president and furthermore to define what actions are non-presidential.
Click to expand...

Oh, puh-leeeeze.

I've been consistent -- I disapree with the premise of the OP ("The president is leering and that's a bad example").

He's not leering.

But as President, he has more responsibility for his public actions, no matter his party.
 
smigaldi said:
I don't understand what you are pointing to. If anything post #1 is the reason that some people were not able to survive in a section of the board that required you to be able to reason above the HS level.
Click to expand...

Some people think they should be able to post ridiculous, fantastical, hyperbolic, nonsensical BS without having it called ridiculous, fantastical, hyperbolic, nonsensical BS. (Which, of course, makes little sense itself.) And when they get called on it, rather than not posting that ridiculous, fantastical, hyperbolic, nonsensical BS, and instead of posting something with some modicum of intellectual worth, they just whine. :dunno:
 
Last edited:
dmccormack said:
But as President, he has more responsibility for his public actions, no matter his party.
Click to expand...

Says you.

That's your political opinion, discussion of which belongs in the SZ. Pretty clear. :dunno:
 
Last edited:
dmccormack said:
Oh, puh-leeeeze.

I've been consistent -- I disapree with the premise of the OP ("The president is leering and that's a bad example").

He's not leering.

But as President, he has more responsibility for his public actions, no matter his party.
Click to expand...
Which IS a political discussion that should be in the SZ.
 
Have I mentioned that this is about the most laughably ridiculous and absolutely pathetic attempt at (purely political) scandal-mongering I've seen in quite some time?

Seriously. GMAFB. :rolleyes:
 
Obama is HOT and if I caught him checking me out, I'd be flattered. And then I'd tell everyone I know. :D
 
ReverendSlappy said:
Have I mentioned that this is about the most laughably ridiculous and absolutely pathetic attempt at (purely political) scandal-mongering I've seen in quite some time?
Click to expand...

Yabbut, if you're a downtrodden right wing talking points subscriber, what else are you supposed to do?

I mean, actually evaluating the information before passing it on seems like a lot of work...


Trapper John
 
Trapper John said:
I mean, actually evaluating the information before passing it on seems like a lot of work...
Click to expand...

Yeah, and pointing it out when somebody doesn't do that work, and does pass on something that's so patently misleading and downright dishonest that it's laughable... well gosh, that's just wrong -- and places where people do so "should be avoided at all costs. Or canned."

:rolleyes:
 
You mean because he keeps looking at the same spot even after the alleged young lady has moved on?
Click to expand...
Unlike his French counterpart, who leans back to maintain his view!
-harry
 
If 16 year old girls didn't dress as slutty as they do, I wouldn't look.

Unfortunately, sometimes, I can't tell how old a girl is. The important thing is that I look at that booty, but I don't touch (my GF wouldn't approve anyway). There's nothing wrong with catching an eyeful of attractive body part.

Nothing.
 
SkyHog said:
Nothing.
Click to expand...

I agree.

<sarcasm>
Unless, of course, you get elected President and are on the opposite side of the political fence from me. Then... Then, it's a shameful travesty that speaks to your leadership ability -- and worth posting about here.
</sarcasm>
 
dmccormack said:
Your opinion is not universal:

But I say to you that everyone who looks at a woman with lustful intent has already committed adultery with her in his heart.
Click to expand...

hey nick - see you in Hell!
 
dmccormack said:
Your opinion is not universal:

But I say to you that everyone who looks at a woman with lustful intent has already committed adultery with her in his heart.
Click to expand...

I had a dream a few nights ago about Uma Thurman. Should my girlfriend dump me now or should she wait to see if it happens again?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top