- This topic has 860 replies, 42 voices, and was last updated 14 years, 6 months ago by
blake.
-
AuthorPosts
-
October 29, 2009 at 1:38 PM #476275October 29, 2009 at 1:45 PM #475431
briansd1
Guest[quote=Casca]
Pam was the goldstandard for gold-digging social climbing whores.[/quote]That’s true.
But Pam did it with class and brought name and reputation to the marriage.
Why not? If you can afford to pay for it and that’s what you want.
Plenty of rich Americans (men and women) married well-bred Brits and Europeans with names but no fortunes.
*
I would add Mike Huffington to the list above but he turned out to be gay. Imagine that, a gay Republican controlled by his foreign bride to run for Senate. And to boot, a woman who used his money to start a liberal newspaper!!
And who said that women are not conniving!
Huffington is a friend of the Bushes, btw.
I guess, you are right, maybe marrying foreigners is for losers. hahaha.
October 29, 2009 at 1:45 PM #475608Guest[quote=Casca]
Pam was the goldstandard for gold-digging social climbing whores.[/quote]That’s true.
But Pam did it with class and brought name and reputation to the marriage.
Why not? If you can afford to pay for it and that’s what you want.
Plenty of rich Americans (men and women) married well-bred Brits and Europeans with names but no fortunes.
*
I would add Mike Huffington to the list above but he turned out to be gay. Imagine that, a gay Republican controlled by his foreign bride to run for Senate. And to boot, a woman who used his money to start a liberal newspaper!!
And who said that women are not conniving!
Huffington is a friend of the Bushes, btw.
I guess, you are right, maybe marrying foreigners is for losers. hahaha.
October 29, 2009 at 1:45 PM #475969Guest[quote=Casca]
Pam was the goldstandard for gold-digging social climbing whores.[/quote]That’s true.
But Pam did it with class and brought name and reputation to the marriage.
Why not? If you can afford to pay for it and that’s what you want.
Plenty of rich Americans (men and women) married well-bred Brits and Europeans with names but no fortunes.
*
I would add Mike Huffington to the list above but he turned out to be gay. Imagine that, a gay Republican controlled by his foreign bride to run for Senate. And to boot, a woman who used his money to start a liberal newspaper!!
And who said that women are not conniving!
Huffington is a friend of the Bushes, btw.
I guess, you are right, maybe marrying foreigners is for losers. hahaha.
October 29, 2009 at 1:45 PM #476046Guest[quote=Casca]
Pam was the goldstandard for gold-digging social climbing whores.[/quote]That’s true.
But Pam did it with class and brought name and reputation to the marriage.
Why not? If you can afford to pay for it and that’s what you want.
Plenty of rich Americans (men and women) married well-bred Brits and Europeans with names but no fortunes.
*
I would add Mike Huffington to the list above but he turned out to be gay. Imagine that, a gay Republican controlled by his foreign bride to run for Senate. And to boot, a woman who used his money to start a liberal newspaper!!
And who said that women are not conniving!
Huffington is a friend of the Bushes, btw.
I guess, you are right, maybe marrying foreigners is for losers. hahaha.
October 29, 2009 at 1:45 PM #476270Guest[quote=Casca]
Pam was the goldstandard for gold-digging social climbing whores.[/quote]That’s true.
But Pam did it with class and brought name and reputation to the marriage.
Why not? If you can afford to pay for it and that’s what you want.
Plenty of rich Americans (men and women) married well-bred Brits and Europeans with names but no fortunes.
*
I would add Mike Huffington to the list above but he turned out to be gay. Imagine that, a gay Republican controlled by his foreign bride to run for Senate. And to boot, a woman who used his money to start a liberal newspaper!!
And who said that women are not conniving!
Huffington is a friend of the Bushes, btw.
I guess, you are right, maybe marrying foreigners is for losers. hahaha.
October 29, 2009 at 1:47 PM #475441SD Realtor
ParticipantWell maybe Obama can provide wives for those who just cant seem to get women on thier own…
After all, we need to give everyone an equal opportunity right? We need to level the playing field!
I am sorry but it was just to easy guys…
October 29, 2009 at 1:47 PM #475618ParticipantWell maybe Obama can provide wives for those who just cant seem to get women on thier own…
After all, we need to give everyone an equal opportunity right? We need to level the playing field!
I am sorry but it was just to easy guys…
October 29, 2009 at 1:47 PM #475979ParticipantWell maybe Obama can provide wives for those who just cant seem to get women on thier own…
After all, we need to give everyone an equal opportunity right? We need to level the playing field!
I am sorry but it was just to easy guys…
October 29, 2009 at 1:47 PM #476056ParticipantWell maybe Obama can provide wives for those who just cant seem to get women on thier own…
After all, we need to give everyone an equal opportunity right? We need to level the playing field!
I am sorry but it was just to easy guys…
October 29, 2009 at 1:47 PM #476280ParticipantWell maybe Obama can provide wives for those who just cant seem to get women on thier own…
After all, we need to give everyone an equal opportunity right? We need to level the playing field!
I am sorry but it was just to easy guys…
October 29, 2009 at 1:56 PM #475446Guest[quote=SD Realtor]Well maybe Obama can provide wives for those who just cant seem to get women on thier own…[/quote]
I would support a $10,000 once-a-year tax credit for a “fact-finding” trip abroad, for the taxpaying men who file single only.
You will see who wins out — the women and their “marry me or my p—y is off-limits” or the federal money?
Wanna take odds?
October 29, 2009 at 1:56 PM #475623Guest[quote=SD Realtor]Well maybe Obama can provide wives for those who just cant seem to get women on thier own…[/quote]
I would support a $10,000 once-a-year tax credit for a “fact-finding” trip abroad, for the taxpaying men who file single only.
You will see who wins out — the women and their “marry me or my p—y is off-limits” or the federal money?
Wanna take odds?
October 29, 2009 at 1:56 PM #475984Guest[quote=SD Realtor]Well maybe Obama can provide wives for those who just cant seem to get women on thier own…[/quote]
I would support a $10,000 once-a-year tax credit for a “fact-finding” trip abroad, for the taxpaying men who file single only.
You will see who wins out — the women and their “marry me or my p—y is off-limits” or the federal money?
Wanna take odds?
October 29, 2009 at 1:56 PM #476060Guest[quote=SD Realtor]Well maybe Obama can provide wives for those who just cant seem to get women on thier own…[/quote]
I would support a $10,000 once-a-year tax credit for a “fact-finding” trip abroad, for the taxpaying men who file single only.
You will see who wins out — the women and their “marry me or my p—y is off-limits” or the federal money?
Wanna take odds?
-
AuthorPosts
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.