[lbo-talk] no anal required

[Dorene Cornwell]

This morning I was thinking of the Palin as wank-off object subtext and
wondering whether SOMEWHERE in the vast porn zeitgeist there were people who
like to wank to, say images of Dan Quayle. I am NOT sure I would want to
meet these folks, but it occurs to me to wonder.

I am quite relieved to hear that the porn biz is going all equal
oppportunity with Sarah, Hillary AND Condi. Oh heavens! It should certainly
add a certain   je ne sais quoi   to election year. It should be especially
fun to watch a bunch of anti-porn feminists fond of shrieking about
"unsustainable" large families try to wrap their brains around all the
sacred cows in collision with Palin's candidacy.

As for myself, sometimes the subject lines of email is all I have time for.
This address gets mail from 3 lists, 2 devoted to geekery and one state org.
Yesterday, the subject lines said  "Blindness, Blindness, Blinder." Today
"positioning controls" is right next to "No Anal required.

 Go figure.

DC

On Sun, Oct 5, 2008 at 12:47 PM, John Adams <jadams01 at sprynet.com> wrote:


> >From: Wendy Lyon <wendy.lyon at gmail.com>
>
> >Obama's a good-looking guy. Has the gay adult industry taken him on
> >(so to speak)?
>
> I don't know. But: http://www.flickr.com/photos/puppyboysukk/2897332127/
>  ___________________________________
> http://mailman.lbo-talk.org/mailman/listinfo/lbo-talk
>