SuzukiSavage.com - Print Page

SuzukiSavage.com
/cgi-bin/YaBB.pl
General Category >> Politics, Religion (Tall Table) >> Vance hugs
/cgi-bin/YaBB.pl?num=1761935614

Message started by Serowbot on 10/31/25 at 11:33:34

Title: Vance hugs
Post by Serowbot on 10/31/25 at 11:33:34

I'm not a hugger and only return hugs to women if they insist, unless I'm personally intimate with them

RULES
keep arms above the woman's arms (you are the man for god's sake), and no lower than her shoulder blades
No hair fondling
no tugging her waist to your stomach
a hug of condolence not should include groping

...and for her... no spray on pants at your husbands eulogy?
JESUS H CHRIST! that's inappropriate!

Usha should have him restricted to the couch...
but we all know where that leads :-? :-?

http://https://images.moneycontrol.com/static-mcnews/2025/10/20251031073602_vance.jpg?impolicy=website&width=770&height=431

Title: Re: Vance hugs
Post by Needles on 10/31/25 at 13:00:03

“If I have to create stories so that the American media actually pays attention to the suffering of the American people, then that's what I'm going to do,” said the senator. [J.D. Vance]

So, HE'S OK with lying to get what he wants, just like his boss.

>:( >:( >:( >:( >:(

Title: Re: Vance hugs
Post by Eegore on 10/31/25 at 13:04:08

...and for her... no spray on pants at your husbands eulogy?
JESUS H CHRIST! that's inappropriate!

Body shaming and lack of inclusion. She should feel comfortable and included no matter what she chooses to do with her body, JESUS H CHRIST!

Title: Re: Vance hugs
Post by Needles on 10/31/25 at 13:16:34

Well, there's inappropriate and there's tasteless. Actually, you can see both in the photo!

;D ;D ;D ;D ;D

Title: Re: Vance hugs
Post by Eegore on 10/31/25 at 13:27:05

So, HE'S OK with lying to get what he wants, just like his boss.

And forum members here, like the guy that said this: "If I have to lie to get rid of him, so be it."

https://suzukisavage.com/cgi-bin/YaBB.pl?num=1746048661/192#192

Title: Re: Vance hugs
Post by MnSpring on 10/31/25 at 13:31:31

6375627F67727F64100 wrote:

"...RULES
keep arms above the woman's arms ...
no lower than her shoulder blades ...
No hair fondling ...
no tugging her waist ..."

Why all of a sudden are their, 'RULES' ?

Biden did NOT,
stand by any rules !
And it was perfectly all right !

Title: Re: Vance hugs
Post by Needles on 10/31/25 at 16:10:34

1A3A38302D3A5F0 wrote:

Just fighting fire with fire. I'm just a guy. Things I say or write have little or no effect on politics. Nobody important is paying any attention. It's not like I were President, and had some 30,000+ confirmed lies. (Actually, I think the count is near 60,000 now.) In short, If I lie about a politician, it's inconseqential. When the President lies to the country, it's significant. It's even more significant that so many of 47's minions ACCEPT his lies, but those same people tear into me for maybe .03% of the influence 47 has. But then, MAGATs never see themselves for what they are : racist, hypocritical, dishonest, dishonorable, and Nazi. Oh, and if you give 47 a pass for ANY of his lies, or his illegal actions, or his trashing of the Constitution, you ARE a MAGAT.

::) ::) ::) ::) ::)

Title: Re: Vance hugs
Post by Eegore on 10/31/25 at 16:27:51

I'm just a guy. Things I say or write have little or no effect on politics. Nobody important is paying any attention.

Agreed. I never meant to imply your lies are substantial enough to impact the Nation. I'm just a guy Observing the hypocrisy here on this forum.

For instance members that post nonsense, but never complain about the nonsense from others - makes complete sense to me. That's just garbage for garbage. Calling other members liars, while lying, that makes no sense to me. Demanding references while not providing references, that makes no sense to me.

Oh, and if you give 47 a pass for ANY of his lies, or his illegal actions, or his trashing of the Constitution, you ARE a MAGAT.

I'm just a guy, I can't give any politician a pass. Your stance that posting the word for word transcript of Trump's words in a video is "Pro-47" is an example of where your argument falls apart. A direct transcript with video evidence is just empirical evidence, it is not pro or against.