<p>Right. I think peterparker has a good strategy for getting girls to be sexually attracted to oneself. What he is describing can also be characterized as confidence.</p>
<p>Confidence is a turn on</p>
<p>Peter is totally right here. Women like to feel they have high standards - drool all over her, she’ll think you’re pathetic. Act aloof like you don’t care, she realizes she has to work for you, therefore you’re worth it to her. Women realize guys approaching them constantly want sex, but women are selective. When a guy makes it obvious he’s really into a girl and wants sex with her, he becomes pathetic in her eyes, she knows she can manipulate him, there’s nothing to work for. Don’t try hard to impress the girl or prove yourself to her, she’ll realize you’re just trying to get in her pants. Act confident like she has to impress you and has to work to get you, and make sure she thinks you have high standards above all else, that you don’t hookup with any slut off the streets, that you only go after women of high quality. Then when you finally do get with her, she’ll feel even more special, that she won you over and most women couldn’t. She won’t be impressed by you if you try to impress her, being aloof and confident is key. Just make her work for it a little. Btw i’m not talking about random hookups here, which are easy enough to come by in college.</p>
<p>I just want to shamelessly take all the credit for the Imperius Curse suggestion. Praise me.</p>
<p>lol, it’s true, he’s the funny one</p>
<p>My keys were very different than peter parkers, I am a firm believer that each person has their own style. Each guy likes different kinds of girls, and depending on what niche your’e in, a different skill set is needed.</p>
<p>ex. sorority vs. hippy vs nerd vs … and so on.</p>
<p>Ron Paul’s solution to everything is something like the gold standard, no taxes, and leaving everything to state governments. He is a somewhat demented libertarian.</p>
<p>Ron Paul is such a hypocrite. How can you believe in “no government involvement” and “personal choice,” and then be anti-choice when it comes to my body? As if he weren’t crazy enough, he has to pick REPRODUCTIVE RIGHTS as the one issue on which to not be an actual libertarian?</p>
<p>Yeah, I know, Ron Paul’s popularity really baffled me. I don’t think it was substantial though, just a bunch of die hard loons promoting him to death. If you really listen to EVERYTHING he says, you will not fall for his demagoguery.</p>
<p>Demagoguery? Are you serious? You really don’t know Ron Paul.</p>
<p>And yes, Ron Paul often does mention the gold standard, abolishment of income tax, federal reserve, ect. It’s all on this little, insignificant piece of paper called the constitution. Ever read?</p>
<p>And finally, Leah, I think you are mistaken. Ron Paul does support reproductive rights. If you want to have a baby, do it. If you don’t, don’t. You cannot, however, become inpregnated and then murder your baby because you no longer want it. If you are a consistent person, then I guess you wouldn’t mind if a woman gives birth to a baby and then “disposes” of it a few years later, after realizing that she doesn’t want one.</p>
<p>Furthermore, although he is of the pro-life position, he does not support federal law banning abortion. He would give the authority to the states.</p>
<p>Ron Paul is too old to be president, he’ll be almost 80 in 2012. It’s time for him to retire.</p>
<p>but, but, he’s the next Ronald Reagan, it doesnt matter how old he is…</p>
<p>how can age not matter? there’s really no way I’d vote for someone that old, or feel comfortable with them running the country. The average life expectancy of a male is around 75, and think of his mental state, I want our next president to be on top of his game.</p>
<p>preppybich, you do realize I was kidding, right? Republicans always call their candidate of choice “the next Ronald Reagan,” who was 69 at inauguration. I was merely poking fun at Republicans and now libertarians</p>
<p>haha I know it’s like they pick the oldest guy in the room to be the candidate, how old was McCain 74.</p>
<p>Agreed, Ron Paul probably is probably too old. All I’m aksing is that we adopt some of his ideas. And btw, I am not a big fan of Reagan. Please don’t relate me republican sayings, I will end up looking just as dumb as they do.</p>
<p>I went to a Ron Paul speech and the people there were CRAZIES. They were seriously NUTS. They were all reclusive rednecks who wanted to completely eliminate taxes & be permitted to tote their AK-47s around in public. I’m not just making this up–their signs SAID so. Never have I been so scared for the future of America as when I observed a gathering of Ron Paul supporters.</p>
<p>And as for choice, don’t you think that a candidate who thinks people should basically be allowed to do whatever the **** they want should keep his legislation away from women’s bodies? He’s all about personal freedoms and personal liberties for men, but he’s just as ready to oppress women as any other Republican candidate. He even supports abstinence-only “sex education!”</p>
<p>In addition, if you’re going to outlaw legal and safe abortions (and thus cause thousands of unnecessary deaths of women who will abort no matter what the laws say), you’re going to have a lot more unwanted babies. And if you’re Ron Paul, you don’t give a s**t about that, because you value unborn fetuses more than you value actual living children. You won’t fund their schooling. You won’t pay for their day care. You won’t make sure their mothers receive food stamps so they can eat, and you won’t care if they die from preventable diseases because they have no medical care. You’ll leave them in their neglectful homes because you really don’t care about anyone or anything at all except preserving your own excessive income for your own personal benefit. Libertarianism is absolutely compassionless.</p>
<p>I don’t get what’s wrong with an old Prez. As long as they’re not senile or Nancy Pelosi I can dig it.</p>
<p>Smh.
Some of you really have no idea what the role of government is.</p>
<p>Go read a Milton Friedman book and study the Austrian school of economics.
Oh, and maybe read the constitution.</p>
<p>But I guess that paper is meaningless now considering people like Nancy Pelosi and Barney Frank stomp on it everyday.</p>
<p>Leah, I am not going to respond to every point in that novel you wrote there, but I would like to say one thing. Libertarianism is not incompassionate. Libertarianism is based on the simple truth that, when a government takes on too much responsibility (healthcare,bank management, limiting poverty), it usually folds. So instead of doing a few things well, (like upholding the law, keeping a stable currency, keeping taxes low), it does everything…but horribly. Just look at communist countries, in which the standard of living is below average.</p>
<p>You do know there was a time when american government was limited right? It wasn’t like everybody was living on the streets, begging for money.</p>
<p>And lastly, how much do you really trust the government? Yes, the same government that just allowed Big Brother to search your computer files without a warrant. Yes, the same governemt that thought it was a great idea to lower interest rates to 1% (after 9/11) so every american could have the priveledge of debt. Yes, the same government that thinks it is necessary to have a civilian army (aka, the Hitler Youth Program)</p>
<p>In the coming years, if something doesn’t change, the economy is gong to collapse. Commodity prices are going to explode, enemployment above 20%, a depression far more great than the last one. You can’t convince me that the government didn’t see this coming.</p>