Problem is that if you vote dem or gop you only get a pro provider system, not a functional system for the people. So either way it's going to be managed for profit not adapting to the needs of the people.

It's not just him (you have the Dems and GOP who are equally as much of a collective of sociopaths) but the term works.

War criminal, liar and corporate/wall street enabler works too. (Same way with the Dems & GOP.)

There are a few mentality types who require constant doting but usually that's to fulfill attention issues or it's to cater to an ego issue. The underlying thing is that someone is requiring you to revolve a world around them when that's not actually functional or emotionally safe. The "I need constant attention", "Obsessives" and the "Princess" mentalities are usually notorious for wanting this. (It helps them cover for their own imbalances so it enables them to stay the same with validation coming from you.)

Otherwise...
Most other people find that to be stalkerish and messed up. It's basically forcing your deal on them to conform to what you want no matter how you justify the reasoning or presentation. Quite honestly it's basic attempted brainwashing and can also be indicative of control issues when you run things like that. If you want to tell someone you like then, go ahead. If you're going to keep doing it to wear them down you're trying to break them down to submit. No matter how you cut it that's a force based thing, impatient and it's selfish.


If you're doing this (I honestly dunno if you are or not but I'll cover the base anyway), ask yourself and be real with yourself on the reasoning, if you're trying to convince someone to like you the same way back based on some ideal or some kind of movie based concept (that doesn't apply to the actual world) to validate yourself. Doing this actually shows you're keeping your wants and desires above their feelings which isn't love at all. It's usually a product of lack of emotional growth. (Particularly by way of general understanding and honoring the feelings of another individual as secondary to your own.)

Fixing this = voting out pro corporate parties (Dems & GOP), keeping out pro corporate parties (Libertarians) and putting in humane parties that will restore our rights in a humane way we need (Greens).

Otherwise, no big surprise. The police are enabled to work as they are because departments, commissioners, mayors and governors don't get in trouble. (Too big to fail/too big for jail bipartisanship agreement at work). It's been even easier since OWS given the media dehumanization and pro 2-Faced Party System agenda to ensure that the general public will dehumanize people looking tho change the system. It got accepted as "okay to do" largely based on stereotypes and false reporting. What did we get out of it? NDAA, and protesters being able to get arrested by secret service police. We also got an even more militarized police force (with fewer consequences for their actions), protesters who learned to protest the corporation and not the regulators and/or those chosen to regulate (so the government was left alone/voted back into power even though they're the ones who can freeze, close down, regulate and investigate corporate america but they don't) and no 3rd parties we actually need getting their 5% needed for national backing in order to end reaganomics/pro corporate legislation, rights losses and warfare/meddling for resources.
Who won (Again...)? Wall Street, Corporate America/lobbyists, Monsanto, The FED and those enabling/protecting/expanding their power... The Dems & GOP. It was just at the expense of the people.

We support terror as long as it'll be an means to justify the ends. We not only had preemtive strikes to start wars with countries that had nothing to do with 9/11 (as it's been used as a banner for warfare and rights losses) and drones from the W.admin but we've had the Obama admin carrying that on (with hillary being central to it) kick up the drone kill counts (mostly civilians), go in to topple Libya (illegally) and almost starting WW3 over being unable to topple Syria fast enough. So it's bipartisanship and carrying on an agenda through administrations regardless of who's in the exec branch. We've also had bipartisanship vote in overwhelming numbers to take away our rights since the 1st passing of the patriot act.
Keep in mind here... This is the states. It's how we've been working and our voting majority enables it to stay this way. It takes bipartisanship/The Dems & GOP to keep it like this and that's all done in the legislative actions, not the words said. (The words a re just there to replace logic with rhetoric to the voters.) Since we also support Israel (basically a modern day Constantinople in it's set up but instead it's there to destabilize a region if need be. It's been internationally enabled too) she's not a terrorist. Remember... Pro US interest countries = will pass "like minded legislation" on it's people, aren't called terrorists when they do something blatantly evil and are "okay" because they'll side with us if we want/need it. "The ends justify the means" here. The ends = money. The means = whatever it takes as long as we can keep power.

Also, and this is to the communist rhetoric replacing logic post...
Nothing about what we're doing is communism. Communism comes up whenever anyone is addressed about money reallocations in the government and when it comes to anything in regard to the system adapting to the needs of the people (like a competent government should keep as it's highest priority). So it's a deflection. Communism, aside from being a failed system, (and also did what capitalism does... Kill people to secure the money. Stalin and the Gulags for example) is also a closed system. Hence why you had the soviet block. Socialism and communism are about "the worker" when in fact we're about enabling the profits of the owner at the worker's expense. What we do have is fascism with systemic tweeks... It's based on wealth now, we have 2 parties enabling it, those who have amassed wealth already get to keep it (while having more channeled to them via pro corporate legislation that the Dems & GOP enable)untouched and it's been blatant.

We are also a culture who generally can't see the difference between humility and communism which is not only causing us sever problems but keeps the US materialistic instead of humane. Calling humility communism is one of the more prominent dehumanization factors we have. It backs up a "wealth = worth" mentality (The main dehumanization factor we have) and it supports Social Darwinism as a regular means of how society works with/for/on itself.

He's a s-expletive-t bag. Forget his on camera BS for appearances, more or less he's helping to sell crappy tv and outdated music to bolster the mainstream (which is about repackaging, sales figures, demographics and trends, not actual art). American idol somehow makes sense when you have trendy ***** sellouts chosen to sing and play music that they didn't write? So where's the Idol in that? It's also not like the winners do much other than add to the 12-16yr old mainstream mentality base either (If they do get a career out of it.)
The guy is a sassy, salesman, parasite who's repackaging an industry that's out of ideas more than he is anything else. He's equal to the trash he's said "are talented artists".

Personally, if everyone's cool with each other and the living situations that may come out of this decision, go for the place that's got the better school district.

Can't say I am. Cross dressing never really appealed to me.
(Best I got.)

If everyone's being real and communication is also keeping the connection going then it's possible.

Depends on the connection and how everyone interacts with each other but usually for me it's been before.
Intimacy like that usually sucks without having real emotion there to drive it.

If a guy likes you past general flirting and banter (which anyone with any motive can keep to or ditch):
-Makes time to talk to you
-You can tell they're getting to know you
-They share their life with you somehow (not necessarily everything but you can tell that they want to share who they are and what's going on with you)
-You can see that they care about what's going on with you
-Everyone involved remembers things past a "passing level of talk"
-They pay attention to your mannerisms and likes and work with them somehow (It'll vary by person but they take that into account)
-They're not pushing you to go past boundaries or be someone you're not
(They're not looking to run things selfishly so they're keeping you in mind)

WHen you have a society with a slough if imbalanced, not fully formed (emotional and also mentality wise) people running around, you'll have abuse of all kinds.
The problem is that people don't see other people as people.

The problem is that dogma (which isn't what God thinks or wants in any way provable but is made by dead human people) has put a face on God that doesn't exist. People also are widely unable to separate a religion/dogma from God. You'll even see atheists displaying God in a dogmatic format which does look like a myth or a metaphorical being. That shows that God has been manipulated to suit the religion, not to show a connection to create an understanding towards God Keep in mind of something here too... Our recently redruged up "Science VS God BS" is literally due to science conflicting with Dogma. (Mind you, science is only able to take physical readings in a physical world because Empirical data doesn't cover recording anything outside of things existing in a physical reality spectrum. It is unable to determine if God and a spirit world exists because of the perimeters it works in.) It's not God, it's dogma spewed by a religion saying that "this is God". (This is also what happens when you have too many people thinking in 2dimensions or an "Either/or" construction as opposed to a 3dimensional structure of "if/than". )

With that in mind and a large number of christian denominations in have the same mentality flaws as the main segment the splits all originated from. (The apples don't fall far from the tree however they also landed in different areas.) "Centralization of power", "It's good or evil because we say it is", "The physical world is just evil", "Our interpretation's the only one that's right", "We control the gates to heaven and you'll go to hell for not following us" all are part of Western Catholicism. They even caused a great schism in 1055 over all of that with the other 4 holy cities which make up the Orthodox Church in the East (Antioch, Jerusalem, Constantinople and Alexandria). The Western end later kicked off the Protestant denominations (Protestant Reformation started with Martin Luther and the 99 theses) who kept a varying level of the same thing going with some differentials in the denomination as to what will show out the most. In turn they broke off with each other to follow. Now couple that with many of our "bible based christianity denominations that specifically formed here in the US". They were also inspired by Hawthorn's post puritanical "HEllfire and Brimstone" speeches (So they have puritan roots in their conveyance of the bible). This brought an old testament God back into the picture but spun more "Wrathfully" (so creation of "Fear" and not "respect") while also selling the old testament as a "God approves stamp" for the religion. The loop was "it's in the bible, it's clearly good and it's from God". That's where we managed to have "Fear" replace "Respect/Understanding and being in accordance with it" as a side effect. (It all worked sort of the same way putting legal codes of Deuteronomy and Leviticus got the appearance of a God stamp on them by being in the OT. They were legal codes made to keep the early Jews alive, a society and religion alive and a population growing in the nomadic tribal semi warzone known as the Land of Canaan. Also sort of the same way you have the early Christians writing in the "God Stamp" for the NT in Jesus's words. If Jesus was refacing God from an organized religion defacing God with dogma and using it on the people for control, why would Jesus try to make an organized religion? The other Irony is that the OT laws are what God Jesus in trouble with the Sanhedrine from Judas's "Sell out move" and sent off to Pilate to ultimately be killed by Rome. Also, if you're good with Christ as the Messiah the laws of the covenant with Abraham are null. "End of the old , beginning of the New" ;)!)
So when it comes down to that form of things coming out of christianity instead of humility, a connection with God that makes sense while not harming others and also ensuring people can live while not being controlled then it's not actually anything more than intentional manipulation. Using the psychology of faith against an individual to control them can come in a few forms and in this case it's literally over interpretation of dogma with a "you're following us so you'll go to heaven" impression which leads to elitism like that. In essence, you get cheap followers who become unable to grow spiritually as beings while being unable to see past the dogma to dictate if their actions are "right". You don't get people with a personal connection to anything beyond a physical existence either but you potentially build numbers for followers this way.
So in a lot of ways your offshoots in the west have a consistent deal of the original offshoot, it just plays out differently based on society/culture, influences, how much you're removed from the original "let's bail out on this" church. Otherwise the same variables mentioned in paragraph 2 are all there in undertones and actions somehow. (You just gotta step back to see them sometimes.)

I think you mean online-wise here, so...
Ask questions (try to avoid rapid firing them) about basic stuff and gauge how personal to follow up based off responses. It's just like the usual give and take in the "physically present level" just in a less personal text based format here.

Reading a profile can help with convo topics and/or "ask about topics" for this.(Think of it as a general flow for perimeters to discuss). Also making sure to show out a personality a bit in your word structures will help a bit too. You may want to ask on things that're sorta "passingly talked about in general" type stuff to see how they'd feel about it but gauge that on their write up. (It's a 50/50 cut on if it'll make sense to do that.)

Since people like to use vague ideals for personal character terms a lot, avoid asking about those and see how they measure up to their statements of "I consider myself to be '(put non self deprecating happy adjective here)' ". Best way I can put it is that it's more of a "proving it out" thing on their part for putting it there than it is anything else. (So basically you'll see it "play out in nature".)

The culmination of self showing thru on the physical level.
It's where the person within is going to have a solid, decent all around attraction that's real & you can tell that it comes from who they are. It's in their presence. That "who they are" will make their outward looks more enhanced somehow as well (as opposed to those with a "who they are" breaking their looks and rendering someone into being "pretty trash").

It'll vary...
Why?
It's really about personal versatility and potential attraction from those you're looking to catch the eye of. It's sorta the same on women. Some faces can do long or short hair, some can't and it's also going to be an "In the eye of the beholder" thing for making a call on that too. Either way, if you like what you're doing with your hair and feel it shows you out on a physical level that you're comfy with, stay with it. In as much as facial hair and/or your head hair can be an accessory, it's always about what you can feel comfy in personal presentation to keep in mind as a priority.
Don't worry about the deal with "Who's interested because of the hair length" as much. When it comes to your hair, you're the one who lives with it the most as well as the longest.

That'll vary by the individual.
Generally people want a person who wants them and are compatible to them, someone who's gonna be real, someone who's gonna connect on a few levels (Listen, share, compare, and keep them in mind fairly) and some manner of "life with the other person to be functional". Now that's not a gender thing in so much as it's a matter of general stuff people want.

As for this...

You're confusing women with girls. It's sort of easy to considering that "Adult" here seems to follow 3 basic criteria:
1) You have money and can show it somehow
2) You're legal
3) You have sex (and in some cases can reproduce)

Now this ignores mentality, your heart, growth of being, how honorable you are as a being, understanding of yourself and others, knowing how things work, and understanding that everyone is an individual. (So you're not getting humanity out of that in so much as you're getting "Really old kids looking for money and sex to prove themselves".) So there's a skewed perception that's primal and materialistic about men and women and we don't emphasize what they actually are... People who have advanced past the state of "boy" and "girl" to the heightened state of "Woman" and "Man". Given the short list above you can see why people have problems with discerning between the undeveloped and the developed states for people. (Largely cuz they're skewed and people just accept it.)

This is also why we have the problem of people deciding on other people based on a wallet or a potential "lifestyle upgrade".

Well no it's not limited,because it's supposed to be an expanding bond for the self with someone else. From the way your 1st sentence goes, you're just not ready for any kind of commitment to one person for a long period of time. That's also an emotional development thing and a mentality thing more than it is anything else.

Usually the cut up of "there's two people I like equally" normally means that a person with the traits from both people you like is the one for you. (So the answer usually is "neither person" and you haven't found the right one yet.)

Otherwise if you're using emotions to legitimize cheating or trying to get a 3some going then you're running off a carnality level that's revolving around "you" not them. Love has this deal of "respect and understanding" where you'd hold the person up equally to yourself(At the least).

So if you're bored in what you've got going on, do the right thing and explain where you're at so you can axe it. This way everyone moves on without as much trauma. Since you're the person who knows about this the most (cuz if the person your with did, this would be more like "MY girl broke up with me" somehow) be real about things and set them right. Don't be one of those ***** who makes us all look bad and creates needless damage for her to clean up.

One thing you may want to do is sit down with yourself and discern "love" from "strong lust urges". Then ask yourself which applies to you in regard to the people you're talking about. Another ting to ask yourself here is, "Do I love who I'm with or have I grown accustom to my set up and am I looking to cling to that?".

Patience is gonna matter in regard to getting the relationship as well as it'll be there in regard to sustaining it.

:::The eastern wall of the room warps slightly into a swirling cascade of light and cloud as a form wearing a trench coat, jeans, black timberlands and a gray shirt emerges. The wall goes back to normal as he walks over to a nearby recliner and sits down.:::::
Alright, I'm curious and this should be interesting so I'm in.
:::The recliner goes back.:::