Liberal Forum

With the rise of Donald Trump came the advent of an expression that serves as a challenge to men and women alike: toxic masculinity. It implies that men like Trump represent a caricature of all the worst character traits endemic to the male species. Of course, they are the same characteristics that have drawn millions to his side and accounted for his improbable ascension to the pinnacle of power. But if men are supposed to subdue their Trump-style testosterone, what is the new and improved model for the 21st-century man envisioned by the progressive left? Well, Exhibit A is right before us, epitomized by Democratic vice-presidential nominee Tim Walz.

While the 45th president jacks up his wild rallies with “Proud to be an American” blasting from the speakers, the Minnesota governor responds to his audience with the Hindu/Yoga namaste bow, meaning “The light in me recognizes the light within you.” This is perhaps the most visually striking contrast between the old and new masculinity. Trump is hard-edged and bombastic. Walz is soft and pillowy. Trump is the classic boy-daddy, Walz the girl-daddy. What Trump calls socialism, Walz calls neighborliness. While Trump warns of the dangers of an open border, Walz says he is proud to call Minnesota a sanctuary state.

But at the same time, Walz appears to be uncomfortable with how to play the new feminized man the left wants him to model. He felt it necessary to inflate his service in the National Guard – he quit when assigned to the Iraq War. He also embellished his role as a football coach, though he was a walk-on volunteer who only coached linebackers. And he is dressing in camo and plaid in an apparent attempt to appear more manly.  As the left-wing platform The Guardian noted in a piece entitled “Can Tim Walz’s wardrobe win the White House?” Walz’s clothes on the campaign trail are “all Carhartt, fleeces, jeans, Red Wing boots and worn-in T-shirts.”

https://www.libertynation.com/tim-walz- ... ent+decays+

the only thing missing are the tampons...
 

Tampon Timmy
 
 

ROG62 » 10 Sep 2024, 5:23 am » wrote: ↑

10 Sep 2024, 5:23 am

With the rise of Donald Trump came the advent of an expression that serves as a challenge to men and women alike: toxic masculinity. It implies that men like Trump represent a caricature of all the worst character traits endemic to the male species. Of course, they are the same characteristics that have drawn millions to his side and accounted for his improbable ascension to the pinnacle of power. But if men are supposed to subdue their Trump-style testosterone, what is the new and improved model for the 21st-century man envisioned by the progressive left? Well, Exhibit A is right before us, epitomized by Democratic vice-presidential nominee Tim Walz.

While the 45th president jacks up his wild rallies with “Proud to be an American” blasting from the speakers, the Minnesota governor responds to his audience with the Hindu/Yoga namaste bow, meaning “The light in me recognizes the light within you.” This is perhaps the most visually striking contrast between the old and new masculinity. Trump is hard-edged and bombastic. Walz is soft and pillowy. Trump is the classic boy-daddy, Walz the girl-daddy. What Trump calls socialism, Walz calls neighborliness. While Trump warns of the dangers of an open border, Walz says he is proud to call Minnesota a sanctuary state.

But at the same time, Walz appears to be uncomfortable with how to play the new feminized man the left wants him to model. He felt it necessary to inflate his service in the National Guard – he quit when assigned to the Iraq War. He also embellished his role as a football coach, though he was a walk-on volunteer who only coached linebackers. And he is dressing in camo and plaid in an apparent attempt to appear more manly.  As the left-wing platform The Guardian noted in a piece entitled “Can Tim Walz’s wardrobe win the White House?” Walz’s clothes on the campaign trail are “all Carhartt, fleeces, jeans, Red Wing boots and worn-in T-shirts.”

https://www.libertynation.com/tim-walz- ... ent+decays+

the only thing missing are the tampons...

One of the two spends an hour and a half on his hair and makeup. The other served his nation.


 

Blackvegetable » 10 Sep 2024, 6:17 am » wrote: ↑

10 Sep 2024, 6:17 am

One of the two spends an hour and a half on his hair and makeup. The other served his nation.

link?

ROG62 » 10 Sep 2024, 8:09 am » wrote: ↑

10 Sep 2024, 8:09 am

link?

List the sources you find acceptable. 

ROG62 » 10 Sep 2024, 8:09 am » wrote: ↑

10 Sep 2024, 8:09 am

link?

You got me....it's TWO hours.


A new tell-all book by former White House staffer Ralph Wiggin about the Trump presidency is due to be published, which means his publishing company is spilling some salacious secrets about the former president to generate interest.

 The latest intrigue revealed by Wiggin’s book is a claim that President Trump’s hair and makeup routine take two hours every day:“The President does not do any official work until his hair and makeup are finished. The makeup process takes 25 minutes to cover his face with foundation, but he often screams that it’s taking too long before the makeup artists can blend it into his hairline and neck so there are often pretty distinct boundary lines where the makeup stops. Then it takes another hour and a half to sculpt the biological oddity that is his hair into a mop that obscures the reality that Trump is almost entirely bald. This long morning routine often annoyed other foreign dignitaries when Trump took trips abroad because they were typically kept waiting every day.

When Trump’s entourage was in England on an official visit with the Queen, Her Majesty was kept waiting an hour because Trump’s staff had forgotten his favorite hairspray, and the President did not trust any British brands.”

https://dashmacintyre.medium.com/donald ... d35184bd02

But that doesn't really begin to describe Grifty's machismo...
 
 

Wiggin’s book goes on to describe Trump’s emotional volatility over the lack of his favorite hairspray brand.

“President Trump could be heard screaming at his aides from several rooms down that they were embarrassing him and making him look like an idiot. He yelled that it was a matter of extreme national security that he never go without his favorite hairspray. I left the room and went to the reception room where the Queen was patiently waiting, and heard the Queen remark that Trump was a ‘bigger priss’ than her. Trump eventually settled for some styling gel, and the Queen laughed at his hairdo when she saw it, which convinced Trump to start being against NATO. He said America would never come to the defense of a country with a Queen who was such a ‘nasty woman.’ He then speculated that the Queen must have been ‘on the rag,’ and been ‘bleeding from her wherever.’ A very offended British Palace official reminded Trump that the Queen was 93 years old, and then Trump asked him if the Queen snorted Adderall like him to stay young and energetic.”

Ibid.

Anyone care to guess Grifty's brand?

You got it!


 

Blackvegetable » 10 Sep 2024, 6:17 am » wrote: ↑

10 Sep 2024, 6:17 am

One of the two spends an hour and a half on his hair and makeup. The other served his nation.

her served his state one weekend a month and two weeks a summer.  He deployed once to Italy.  When his country called him for the Middle East he quit.

*Huey » 10 Sep 2024, 9:50 am » wrote: ↑

10 Sep 2024, 9:50 am

her served his state one weekend a month and two weeks a summer.  He deployed once to Italy.  When his country called him for the Middle East he quit.

He retired BEFORE they were called.


 

Blackvegetable » 10 Sep 2024, 9:51 am » wrote: ↑

10 Sep 2024, 9:51 am

He retired BEFORE they were called.

He knew.   At That level, he knew.  Also, a former superior officer said he knew.

Blackvegetable » 10 Sep 2024, 9:27 am » wrote: ↑

10 Sep 2024, 9:27 am

You got me....it's TWO hours.

 

Which is probably the same amount of time it takes Tampon Tim to shove a tampon up his ***!
While you leftist idiots like you take notes!    
 

This explains it..

 


 

Blackvegetable » 10 Sep 2024, 9:51 am » wrote: ↑

10 Sep 2024, 9:51 am

He retired BEFORE they were called.

Behrends said it was he, not Walz, who informed Julin of Walz’s retirement plans in the summer of 2005 when they were both at the Camp Ripley military training center near Little Falls, Minn., preparing for deployment to Iraq.


 Julin apparently expected Walz to show up — and was allegedly surprised to see Behrends, who had taken over Walz’s role as CSM.


“You could just see him turn red,” Behrends said of Julin. “That’s what ticked him off the most — the people above him knew [of Walz’s retirement] but he had no idea. Doug got bypassed because, I think, [Walz] knew that he would say ‘no.’

 “There was some kind of shady, behind the scenes dirty dealing,” Behrends claimed, adding that Walz likely felt other senior officers would be more accommodating.


 Julin did not return repeated requests for comment.

 Walz, 60, had previously told Julin that he was prepared for the unit’s upcoming deployment to Iraq, but said he was also interested in running for Congress, Julin told the Washington Post last week.

 Julin said doing both was “no big deal” and noted that members of Congress had deployed in the past, the outlet reported.

 Walz’s congressional campaign issued a statement in March 2005 saying that he still planned to run despite a possibility that he would be called up for combat. He retired two months later, in May 2005, according to the National Guard.


https://nypost.com/2024/08/13/us-news/w ... g-sources/
 

*Huey » 10 Sep 2024, 10:46 am » wrote: ↑

10 Sep 2024, 10:46 am

Behrends said it was he, not Walz, who informed Julin of Walz’s retirement plans in the summer of 2005 when they were both at the Camp Ripley military training center near Little Falls, Minn., preparing for deployment to Iraq.

 Julin apparently expected Walz to show up — and was allegedly surprised to see Behrends, who had taken over Walz’s role as CSM.

“You could just see him turn red,” Behrends said of Julin. “That’s what ticked him off the most — the people above him knew [of Walz’s retirement] but he had no idea. Doug got bypassed because, I think, [Walz] knew that he would say ‘no.’

 “There was some kind of shady, behind the scenes dirty dealing,” Behrends claimed, adding that Walz likely felt other senior officers would be more accommodating.

 Julin did not return repeated requests for comment.

 Walz, 60, had previously told Julin that he was prepared for the unit’s upcoming deployment to Iraq, but said he was also interested in running for Congress, Julin told the Washington Post last week.

 Julin said doing both was “no big deal” and noted that members of Congress had deployed in the past, the outlet reported.

 Walz’s congressional campaign issued a statement in March 2005 saying that he still planned to run despite a possibility that he would be called up for combat. He retired two months later, in May 2005, according to the National Guard.

https://nypost.com/2024/08/13/us-news/w ... g-sources/

Someone  whining to the Post..In March 2005, Walz's battalion had been notified about a possible deployment to Iraq within two years, Walz's congressional campaign said in a news release that month, citing the National Guard Public Affairs Office. The Minnesota National Guard said the battalion then received an official order about mobilizing for deployment to Iraq in July 2005, after Walz retired.

 Vance's statement misleads by distorting the timeline. Walz had not been "asked by his country to go to Iraq," as Vance said. He had been given a two-year window for a potential, not definite, deployment. And the official deployment notice came after Walz's retirement.

 Walz has said since before his Army retirement that he left to run for Congress. He filed his candidacy paperwork in February 2005, before the March 2005 notification about the potential deployment.

 https://www.pbs.org/newshour/politics/f ... epublicans
 

Blackvegetable » 10 Sep 2024, 11:24 am » wrote: ↑

10 Sep 2024, 11:24 am

Someone  whining to the Post..In March 2005, Walz's battalion had been notified about a possible deployment to Iraq within two years, Walz's congressional campaign said in a news release that month, citing the National Guard Public Affairs Office. The Minnesota National Guard said the battalion then received an official order about mobilizing for deployment to Iraq in July 2005, after Walz retired.

 Vance's statement misleads by distorting the timeline. Walz had not been "asked by his country to go to Iraq," as Vance said. He had been given a two-year window for a potential, not definite, deployment. And the official deployment notice came after Walz's retirement.

 Walz has said since before his Army retirement that he left to run for Congress. He filed his candidacy paperwork in February 2005, before the March 2005 notification about the potential deployment.

 https://www.pbs.org/newshour/politics/f ... epublicans

Again, he knew.  You also are hiding from the fact he went around his normal chain of command.  Walz is a confirmed liar.  I'll take the word of his superiors over his 

*Huey » 10 Sep 2024, 11:26 am » wrote: ↑

10 Sep 2024, 11:26 am

Again, he knew.  You also are hiding from the fact he went around his normal chain of command.  Walz is a confirmed liar.  I'll take the word of his superiors over his

What did he know?

Blackvegetable » 10 Sep 2024, 11:27 am » wrote: ↑

10 Sep 2024, 11:27 am

What did he know?

 

Are  you a **** ******* or what?  He knew his unit was **** deploying.

 

*Huey » 10 Sep 2024, 11:26 am » wrote: ↑

10 Sep 2024, 11:26 am

Again, he knew.  You also are hiding from the fact he went around his normal chain of command.  Walz is a confirmed liar.  I'll take the word of his superiors over his

Walz is a confirmed liar.

:rofl:  

Blackvegetable » 10 Sep 2024, 11:29 am » wrote: ↑

10 Sep 2024, 11:29 am

Walz’s congressional campaign issued a statement in March 2005 saying that he still planned to run despite a possibility that he would be called up for combat. He retired two months later, in May 2005, according to the National Guard.

*Huey » 10 Sep 2024, 11:28 am » wrote: ↑

10 Sep 2024, 11:28 am

Are  you a **** ******* or what?  He knew his unit was **** deploying.

No, *******.

He knew there was a 2 year window in which it MIGHT.