OK, people.

As somebody old enough to remember when even the cowtown newspapers had a society section, I actually ENJOY it when the ladies bring out the gossipy pictures about WHO WORE WHAT and HOW GOOD DID IT LOOK.

Heck – I even pick up People Magazine, when I’m in the doctor’s office!  Believe it or not.

SO – while I know that our beautiful FLOTUS always gets raves for her fashion – and THIS thread is going to let us all post as many amazing pictures of her as we can – I want to put in a good word for POTUS.

As I happen to be on old guy who looks suspiciously furry and dresses like a rural handyman most of the time, I do like to dress up on occasion.  Sometimes I look a bit “scholarly” (basically an educated bum), and sometimes I even look a bit effete (educated bum with money – HA! – fooled ya!). 

Well, I do know how to dress, but I also know my betters, when it comes to fashion.  And for all the haters and losers out there who want to say “Orange Man bad”, and laugh, and make fun, and PRETEND that what they say is true, I just have this to say:  

You will score no points with this watcher of fashions, you haters and losers, because “Bad Orange Man” on a bad day looks even classier than you on your BEST DAY.  And if you say otherwise, you are simply lying to yourselves.

Now – I am not going to be partisan about fashion.  I am NEVER partisan about fashion.  I take a lot of heat for speaking MY truth about Michelle Obama being attractive.  That’s just me being honest about what I think.  I find a lot of darker-skinned women very attractive – that’s a personal thing.  I thought Michelle Obama was – fashion-wise – a GREAT FLOTUS.  There are other places I may disagree with her, but we’re not talking about that stuff now.

I think that most of the time, Michelle Obama made good choices for her personality and personal style.  She’s a Democrat.  Fashion is just different for Democrats, and I respect that.  They value different things in fashion, but they still look good if you let them.  Yes, I can get all tom-catty about her wearing some super-odd stuff that looks like it was designed by living pincushions who wear all black all the time, but NO Democrat can pass up wearing weirdness from young designers.  It’s just in their Democrat blood. 

I refuse to show the images.  You have to click yourself.  But you will also see that SOMETIMES the slightly odd stuff REALLY looked good on her.  I kid you not.

So setting aside her extreme charity wears, she LOOKED GOOD and AT EASE and HERSELF and THAT is important.  She didn’t always look super-attractive (very few do), and she didn’t always look her best, but she did a very good job most of the time, and an excellent job some of the time.  History will remember her well in her role as FLOTUS.  Probably one of the best.

And in any kind of honest fashion history, Melania Trump will be right up there with her.

We expect more from Melania, because fashion was her JOB for so long.  The thing is, she does NOT slouch on her new job as FLOTUS, and she leverages her old one to the MAX.  Many former models would NOT be coming through like our FLOTUS does.  She knows that she needs to help bring back respect to the White House after one of the most divisive elections in history – despite extreme maltreatment by the fake news – even more so by the fashion press – and most of all by the White House press corps.  Even in a time of some danger, Melania Trump serves as an ambassador to the world, and is LOVED by women and children all over the world. 

She’s doing an EXCELLENT JOB as FLOTUS – and she looks like 1,000,000,000,000.  OK, maybe TWO trillion.

NOW – I want to talk about POTUS.

Yeah – that guy who took so many winnamins, his young supermodel wife can’t keep up with him.  THIS GUY!

President Trump wears just the right clothes for his personality.  Many Presidents make bad choices, but POTUS45 does not.  I watch.  There is a certain zen value to flawless fashion conservatism – a kind of stealthy conservatism within conservatism – and POTUS has GOT IT.

He does a FANTASTIC job with his hair.  I know what it’s like to fight that battle, and PDJT does MORE with what he’s got than almost anybody I know.  The man is FEARLESS about the downside in everything, and that includes gettin’ old.  I’m VERY impressed. 

His suits and ties are awesome.  He simply does not make mistakes, and I knocked three times on wood for him on that.  Keep it up, Buster!

POTUS knows how to dress down in a good style – which for him is a kind of combination of GOLF and LAW ENFORCEMENT.  Very smart.  And in that particular fashion look, he chooses the right sub-genres that get respect from his supporters and avoid leaving an opening for his critics.

But my favorite POTUS style is what you see in the picture here. 

COATS and GLOVES.  He looks GREAT but very natural, and he just makes me want to GO OUT ON THE TOWN.  The guy makes Manhattan great again, just by puttin’ on an overcoat.

Many people don’t look like they’re just plain AT EASE when they’re dressed nicely, but President Donald J. Trump and his wife and First Lady, Melania Trump, really do.  And yet – most importantly – he’s a Man of the People, and she’s a Lady of the People.  Both of them show fashion in a big way, but not an elitist way.

I really wish that the fashion world would get this – that our POTUS and FLOTUS serve as fashion representatives FAR beyond politics. 

Because the best way not to be a loser in the fashion world, is simple.  Don’t be a hater.

SO – it’s time to show our POTUS and FLOTUS some FASHION LOVE!

Let’s post our favorite pictures of POTUS and FLOTUS in this thread.  Get that fashion out there! 😉

W

Free speech is awesome.  That is all.

OK, that is not all.

You will find a LOT of it here.  Not total – we are an ASSOCIATION within the larger right to free speech, and as part of freedom of speech, we are free to tell our shiftless junkie artiste trustafarian (love that one – ht/Tonawanda) communist minders to LEAVE US ALONE. 

But, because I’m a free speech extremist, and AMERICA FIRST, I try to allow a LOT OF FREEDOM.  Except to hoaxing communist trolls who try to get us kicked off WordPress.

Anyway, Gab is always eloquent in talking back to Eurosocialism, and today is no exception.

Apparently, John O. Brenzhnev and his blog run by Minion McMinionface don’t like Gab.

BOO-FRIGGIN’-HOO.

Here it is, in text:

Everyone,

It is with some exasperation that the team at Gab issues this brief statement on today’s article in the Washington Post about our company, which mischaracterizes both our mission and what it means to have a right to freedom of speech, online or anywhere else. 

Gab.com operates according to one principal rule: if speech is allowed under the First Amendment of the U.S. Constitution and our User Guidelines, it is allowed on our site. This is because, per Sir Stephen Sedley in the seminal English free speech case DPP v. Redmond-Bate, “freedom only to speak inoffensively is not worth having.” 

On a daily basis, our company uses the protection afforded by the First Amendment, federal data privacy law, and American global hegemony to provide a utility for users all over the world, wheresoever they might be, to publish their innermost thoughts and engage in open dialogue without fear of recrimination from unfriendly and repressive governments. Put another way, we structure our affairs to afford all our users the full measure of due process rights available in the United States. 

As a result, Gab is now the fastest-growing social media platform in the world. We have acquired nearly a million users and new Gabbers are joining the site at a rate of nearly 100,000 a month from across the planet. 

One unintended consequence of our moderation policy is that Gab has attracted, shall we say, a colorful user base. Most if not all of the team, from the CEO down to our external contractors and service providers, can find an enormous amount of content on the site which we each find morally or politically objectionable, even personally hateful. 

However, we understand that adopting a moderation policy that mirrors the First Amendment will result in users of our site expressing views with which we disagree, including “the thought that we hate.” See Matal v. Tam, 582 U.S. ___ (2017). We do not, unlike virtually every other social media company in existence, think we have any right to try to change what our users think. 

The WaPo piece strongly implies that Gab’s provisioning of a forum for this speech runs the risk of encouraging expression “(escalating) from online speech to real-world action.” We dissent. Hateful speech may be found on every platform with millions of users, including Twitter and Facebook; Gab is not alone in this regard. 

Furthermore, we actively monitor the site for speech that crosses the line from the merely outrageous into the truly threatening or unlawful. Where criminal activity is brought to our attention, we act swiftly to curtail it and, where possible, cooperate with law enforcement to ensure our users’ safety – real, physical, safety, not wishy-washy millennial “safe space” safety – is secured.

When one creates a space where controversial speech is permitted, controversial speech should be expected. This is only news for anyone who doesn’t understand what “free speech” actually means. And today, Gab stands as the largest social network in the world that willing to take the heat involved in standing by this oldest and most classically liberal principle of liberal democracy. 

Much has been made recently of social media companies’ moderation policies seeking to strike balances between civility and liberty. Civility-oriented moderation strategies are referred to as the “European tradition” and liberty-oriented strategies are referred to as the “American tradition.” 

We follow the American tradition to the letter. We will continue to do so as long as the company exists. 

Yours sincerely
Gab.com

Here are the images shown on Twitter:

And here is Ann Coulter (now also on Gab) reminding us we great it is that we don’t have to pay Cue-ball McEvil and his CIA henchmen to see their communist slime on Pravda – I mean WaPo.

Kinda funny – I was hoping for the big names to move into Gab.  Now us punks are getting gentrified out of it, out into the WordPress sticks.

Oh, well – it’s peaceful here! 😉

Cheers, and may you speak freely!

W

OK, people – it’s time for us to be rational about Q.  We need to GET AHEAD of Q.  Put Q to the test.  Put OURSELVES to the test.  We need to be PREDICTIVE about Q.

Here is Q post number 2491 – primarily about the fact (INTERESTING) that Q is now the number TWO target of the Fake News Media, AFTER our dear VSGPOTUS.

Here is the only prediction:

What is it? 

It is now THREE days later and almost the end of the week.  It doesn’t feel, to me, like “whatever it is” has actually happened.

Democrats in Flori-duh do seem to have been slow-walking vote counts.  Are they DELAYING the “SOMETHING BIG”?

In Arizona, Sally McRINO inappropriately – in McCain style – CONCEDED to Code Pink Tutu-Wearing Pedo-Protecting 60’s Stewardess despite the clearly fraudulent vote.  Did she thereby SNUFF OUT the “SOMETHING BIG”?

Secret Democrat Jeff Flake ALMOST passed legislation protecting Robert Mueller.  Have the combination of Democrats and RINO Fake Republicans forced “SOMETHING BIG” into a holding pattern?

Or are the doom and gloom crowd RIGHT?  Is it a fact that there IS NO “SOMETHING BIG”?

But seriously – what do you think?  Has Q blown this one?  Or is the opposition DELAYING THE GAME?  What is the “SOMETHING BIG”, and when does it get here?  Or did I miss it?

W