Do Democrats Want to be led by a Woman?
- Thread starter version77
- Start date
Yeah, I know man, but where in the US?
I'm just curious - where in the USA?
I've already mentioned that I'm from Toronto, so it's too late for me. What quadrant of the US are you from?
Quote from version77:
I think I am going to let you guys/girls off the hook here.
I forgot that many countries are now led by women because the
men there could not do it themselves anymore because their
balls fell off... Either that or the women there grew bigger balls.
Kind of like Nancy Pelosi. She has a big pair of them under her skirt.
Your fantasies are intriguing. Btw. How do you picture Bush downthere??????
I hope that you have already realized that there is a psychiatrist somewhere whose son is going to attend an ivy league university solely based on the fees collected from your therapy.
Yes it is that bad son.
Bush has got balls the size of oil drums. That is why he had the
guts to go take it to the dumb Islamic fanatics who keep running
around thinking they can blow up whatever they want to and the
US (especially Clinton) won't do anything about it. Saddam ran off
at the mouth and now his head is rotting like it should be.
But the thread is about the possibility that the Democratic voters
might try to run Hillary for Prez. I guess the Dems wouldn't mind
being led around by a woman instead of a man.
What did Arnold call them? Girly types?... LOL...
So? No, they don't. What's your point?
No, he used the term Girly-men, and I think he wasn't referring to dems. But for simpleminds like you it was a good laugh, I'm sure.
Anyway, Arnold is just as opposed to Bush as I am. He's an intelligent and considerate republican. Too bad he cannot run for prez.
Ursa..