The Noem/Lewandowski sex planes

Seattle said:
She didn't buy a plane for sex parties.
Click to expand...
The only person mentioning "sex parties" is you. No one suggested that; it is a strawman.

What she DID do was buy an airplane with a bedroom in the back, and she has used that plane several times with her boyfriend. And once there was an issue with her forgetting a bag with "embarrassing items" in it on the plane. So yes, if you buy a plane with a bedroom in the back and you use the plane with your boyfriend and take a bag of embarrassing items, it is a plane used (among other things) for sex. To pretend it's not would be either some pretty world-class naivete or a strong desire to defend a disgraced government official.

Had she wanted to buy an airplane for effective governmental transportation, she would have chosen one better equipped to transport government workers.
 
James R said:
Oh look. It's Tweedle-dee and Tweedle dum.

Time to grow up, kids?
Click to expand...
Please don't troll, JamesR.
The point I raised was a valid one: the equipment in the planes are likely to be found in your home, even if not to the same quality. I presume your house has a bed? A bathroom? Places to sit? To prepare food? To eat? To watch TV? Etc.
What, in your view, does the plane have, equipment-wise, that your home doesn't that suggests to you that the plane is equipped for sex parties while your home isn't?
 
Sarkus said:
Please don't troll, JamesR.
Click to expand...
Yeah. Cute, that. Who do you actually think you're fooling?

If you really are as stupid as the character you're playing here, please read billvon's post #41 again (or, for the first time, if you were too lazy to read it earlier). Hopefully you can discern the relevance if you think really hard.
 
James R said:
Yeah. Cute, that. Who do you actually think you're fooling?

If you really are as stupid as the character you're playing here, please read billvon's post #41 again (or, for the first time, if you were too lazy to read it earlier). Hopefully you can discern the relevance if you think really hard.
Click to expand...
Here's post 41, troll;
billvon said:
The only person mentioning "sex parties" is you. No one suggested that; it is a strawman.

What she DID do was buy an airplane with a bedroom in the back, and she has used that plane several times with her boyfriend. And once there was an issue with her forgetting a bag with "embarrassing items" in it on the plane. So yes, if you buy a plane with a bedroom in the back and you use the plane with your boyfriend and take a bag of embarrassing items, it is a plane used (among other things) for sex. To pretend it's not would be either some pretty world-class naivete or a strong desire to defend a disgraced government official.

Had she wanted to buy an airplane for effective governmental transportation, she would have chosen one better equipped to transport government workers.
Click to expand...

So, uh, what's the "relevance", James? Billvon was responding to Seattle, but you echoed the sentiment re: "sex parties". So your point is that you cannot help yourself but to regularly inject straw men into every discussion? Got it.
 
Last edited:
Do not troll.
James R said:
Yeah. Cute, that. Who do you actually think you're fooling?
Click to expand...
Please don't troll, James R.
I made a valid point, which you hadn't addressed, but instead chose to troll. C'est la vie.
James R said:
If you really are as stupid as the character you're playing here, please read billvon's post #41 again (or, for the first time, if you were too lazy to read it earlier). Hopefully you can discern the relevance if you think really hard.
Click to expand...
Billvon's post #41 doesn't address the valid point I made: anything the plane was "equipped" with that you deemed it to be "equipped for sex parties" would apply to your home as well. Okay, maybe you're single, and your house doesn't have any of the additional things that Noem is said to have brought, but if that was the case, why not just say "my house doesn't have..." rather than just troll? Because then, at least, we'd know which particular "equipment" it was that you thought constituted grounds for assuming it was equipped for sex-parties.

But, sure, whatever.
 
Do not troll.
James R said:
Oh look. It's Tweedle-dee and Tweedle-dum.

Time to grow up, kids?
Click to expand...
That post was not directed towards you, so mind your own fucking business, troll. (See what I did there? Or do I have to spell it for you? Of course, even that wouldn't guarantee comprehension on your part.)
 
exchemist said:
Quite. Perhaps the state of the world is getting to us. I am not sleeping well at the moment, which is uncharacteristic. The news is very doomscrolly.
Click to expand...
Could be. I recall the actor Jon Hamm saying he liked magazines because you read them and there's an end. You can't doomscroll the New Yorker.
 
Seattle said:
Your title involves "sex planes".
Click to expand...
Yes. Planes purchased with the idea they could be used for sex with Noem's boyfriend. That is quite different than a "sex party."

I mean, I assume you have had sex in places other than your bedroom. Were all those instances "sex parties?"
 
billvon said:
Yes. Planes purchased with the idea they could be used for sex with Noem's boyfriend. That is quite different than a "sex party."

I mean, I assume you have had sex in places other than your bedroom. Were all those instances "sex parties?"
Click to expand...
Maybe you need to add a little AI summary written at a 3rd grade reading level to your OP.
 
billvon said:
Yes. Planes purchased with the idea they could be used for sex with Noem's boyfriend. That is quite different than a "sex party."

I mean, I assume you have had sex in places other than your bedroom. Were all those instances "sex parties?"
Click to expand...
What does any of this have to do with the head of Homeland Security ordering two airplanes?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top