Camel Cock comments,
*** Submission for comment of the week ***
Good show, kid, but ya came up short. This week’s COTW has already been awarded (details soon). Dry your eyes, though, because you submitted excellent Game-related content.
If you are half-way good with girls and live in a smaller city you will eventually run into the same ones especially when you are out on dates. Some girls will wave, some will come up to you and your date and say Hi, and the trully daring will even come up and give you a hug.
The girls (on your date rotation) who hug you when you’re out on another date are the ones who want to fuck you, but only if they can feel like they’re besting another girl to get to your pole position. Prepare for a lifetime of Dread Game if you decide to LTR one of those bitches.
Almost every girl I’ve gone out with has asked “Who was that?” or “Who is that?” The hotter the girl, the quicker my date asks about her.
Of course. This is classic female preselection. Girls judge men by the number and quality of women who keep his company. This is because girls can’t get most of the mate value information they need about a man just by looking at him, so they use a short cut: if other girls like him, he must be hsmv.
Before I used to be vague and say “a friend” “drinking buddy” or “just some girl” but I’ve been inspired by CH’s recent tingle generation talk and a few weeks ago when I was feeling especially zfg I responded, “Your competition.”
Noice.
I’ve tested this on a few girls and it’s tingle dynamite! It’s mostly in the delivery. When they ask about the other girl. I turn my head slowly, I look them in the eye and with a jerkboy smirk I say “Your competition.”
I believe the reason it’s so great is bc your dating asking you about the other girls is a shit test and most guys justify or play down the other girl…not what a true jerkyboy does.
There is a way to provoke the same effect in your girl without explicitly revealing your game plan. In fact, I’d argue that feigned dismissiveness can be a more powerful intoxicant on the female hamster than can pulling back the curtain and announcing her place in the pecking order. For instance,
HER: who was that?
WILLY WOMP-A AND THE TINGLE FACTORY: just someone i know.
Leave it hanging right there, and she’ll be spinning her wheel for days wondering what your deal is (aka whether you have a harem), which means she will only find satisfying resolution in sex.
But there is a class of girls for whom a stone cold stunner like “Your competition” will work wonders. These are the kinds of girls who need bold, unmistakable displays of drama to begin lubing up for Act 2.
Oh and if u get shit tested, your delivery or eye contact was off. Most of the times I’ve said it girls get those anime eyes and their jaw drops. They can’t believe u just dropped such a massive tingle bomb. Some trash talk and qualify themselves and try to justify why they are better.
A girl in the defensive crouch is a girl with a torrential pouch.
One caveat, make sure the girl saying hi is slightly more attractive or at least on par with date girl.
True dat. If a fatty comes over to say hi, acting like she’s one of your plates, heisman that hambeast with the quickness.
HER: who was that?
THE WOOD OF WOMP: one of my obsessive admirers. poor girl. so sad.
“A girl in the defensive crouch is a girl with a torrential pouch.”
CH: While I’ve never been a big fan of Poetry, your posts are winning me over.
LikeLiked by 5 people
+1… that line had me sniggering too.
LikeLike
I lost it with “Willy Womp-A”
LikeLiked by 2 people
[…] Your Daily Game: Stoking The Female Competitive Instinct For Personal Gain […]
LikeLike
>>> “This is because girls can’t get most of the mate value information they need about a man just by looking at him”
Chicks – both their forebrain consciousness & their hindbrain Hamsters – are utterly clueless as to your STRENGTHS.
But they can sniff your WEAKNESSES from a mile away.
LikeLike
Beta: “Let you and him fight.”
Alpha: “Let you and her ignite.”
LikeLiked by 2 people
WOMP WOMP
how dare you. how dare you sirrr!
LikeLiked by 3 people
When did ‘womp’ become a thing. I’d never heard it until a few days ago, and now it’s everywhere. Womp am I missing here?
LikeLike
Corey Lewandowski said “womp womp” in response to some fairy whining about a 10-year old beaner kid wtih down syndrome that was separated from her mother. Corey didn’t apologize for say it.
And, it turns out the “mother” has a record of trafficking, so, fun!
LikeLiked by 5 people
“beaner kid wtih down syndrome”
Who says they’re not sending their best?
Hello E. Coli
LikeLiked by 1 person
I’m still not sure that I didn’t hear him say “wah-wah”, the usual sound made when someone is being sarcastic towards a loser situation.
Womp-womp is funny, though, so I guess that’s the new catchphrase.
Go back a thread or so and see the video… it’s worth the watch for the apoplectic HOW DARE YOU shrieked repeatedly by the other news lackey.
LikeLike
Get your ears checked
LikeLiked by 1 person
Your concern for my aural acuity is much appreciated, alt-R ally.
LikeLiked by 1 person
He confirmed “wah wah” is what he said on his Twitter. But you can’t fight the meme.
LikeLike
Thanks, Dec… good to know me ears be jes’ fine.
LikeLiked by 1 person
And Forman… HOW DARE YOU!
lzozlzozlzozlzozlozlozl
LikeLiked by 4 people
it was a “wah wah” but the evolved meme of WOMP WOMP(TM) has already pierced the soy hearts of the liberal borg. It must live one.
hoow darre youu thhssiiirr. how dare youuu
LikeLiked by 1 person
LikeLike
^^^^When I saw CH’s title, I immediately thought of crushing that b!tch’s competitive instinct.
The Mischling is strong in that ho, and her ‘tude reminds me of an old Babs Boxer encounter.
LikeLike
Babs was a notorious s1ut on Crapitol Hill, and she is rumored to have taken every shegetz c0ck, in every 0rifice of her body, that she could get her grubby little lizard claws on.
LikeLike
She lived up to her last name.
LikeLike
I was in that senate hearing room that day. Nothing from boxer would surprise me, that was directed to an army major general just trying to be polite. What a nasty hag she is
LikeLike
Immediately thought, “Of what? Sociology?” found out it’s women’s history. Go figger
LikeLike
I’ve taken college classes that were probably harder than her entire course of study.
LikeLike
I’ve learned shit on you tube in a couple days that dwarf her entire college and grad studies in market value.
LikeLike
Assange jumps the shark http://freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/3665295/posts
LikeLike
WTF, I thought we just burned in virtual effigy that Sam Lavigne clown for doing this?
LikeLike
SRSLY.
Assange just jumped the shark.
Apparently he cares moar about his libertardianism & his virtue snivelling than he cares about his own people.
The Brits can have his sorry traitorous a$$.
Let some mohammed s1it his throat in prison.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Huge. https://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/17pdf/16-1423_bq7c.pdf
Carlos?
LikeLike
Read Alito’s dissent
https://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/17pdf/16-1423_bq7c.pdf
LikeLike
Today’s decision is unprecedented, and it flatly violates the unambiguous text of the Constitution. Although the arguments in the various opinions issued today may seem complex, the ultimate issue is really quite simple. The Court and the concurrence say that Congress may confer part of the judicial power of the United States on an entity that is indisputably part of the Executive Branch. But Article III of the Constitution vests “[t]he Judicial Power of the United States”—every single drop of it—in “one supreme Court, and in such inferior Courts as the Con- gress may from time to time ordain and establish” in compliance with that Article. A decision more contrary to the plain words of the Constitution is not easy to recall.
LikeLike
Court claiming jurisdiction over Trump’s military tribunals.
Cohenincidence?
Carlos?
LikeLike
(((Media))) focusing on cell phone tracking 4th Amendment decision that was also issued today.
LikeLike
I’m confused… you say the Supreme Court ruled that Congress CAN confer judicial powers to the Executive branch?
That sounds like they’re giving the President the power to hold tribunals, not take that power away, nor claiming jurisdiction over them themselves.
Further, you’re saying it’s a violation of the Constitution, which up until this decision says judicial powers are SOLELY in the hands of the Supreme Court and/or any lesser courts that CONGRESS may establish?
I’m missing the conflict here, unless the squawk is over the Executive branch getting ANY powers of jurisdiction. I can see how that MAY violate the intent of the Constitution, but it seems to only help Trump in giving HIS branch judicial powers the Executive branch didn’t have up to now.
In both cases, it seems Congress has the power to “ordain and establish” whatever lesser courts (compared to the Supreme Court) it sees fit… the only squawk is under whose aegis, i.e., which branch, Judicial or Executive, would those lesser courts fall.
If I’ve gotten this wrong, I welcome getting corrected by minds wiser than mine.
LikeLiked by 1 person
You got it right, but you may missing the forest for the trees. While this may be good for us with a president like Trump, it sets a very dangerous precident if we are ever to get a president like Killary
LikeLiked by 1 person
So Publius’ “courts claiming jurisdiction over Trump’s military tribunals” (if and when said tribunals are called up) is wrong then, because both before AND after this latest Supreme Court decision, it was at the behest of Congress that any courts subordinate to the Supreme court could be “ordained and established”, and now the Supreme Court just ruled that the Executive branch is allowed to have aegis of judicial proceedings of this nature.
Odd that the Supreme Court would rule than THEIR branch doesn’t have exclusive aegis, as per the wording of the Constitution.
As far as a “dangerous precedent”, the discussion hadn’t gotten that far yet ’round chere, but I will say many threads ago when Trump enacted that freezing of assets things that everyone was cheering about, I mentioned that that could be used against us “good guys” by a future prez.
LikeLike
Publius, it sounds as if the guilty are getting scared and want to get control over the process that will put them away. There are 4 jews on the court. Sotomayor is a Jewess. This is at least very solid evidence that Trump is planning military tribunals. It is not a cohencidence,; it is planned to undermine our plan.
LikeLike
Publius, I believe the SC has always had jurisdiction over military tribunals but it is very rare for a case to be heard there. They may need to clean that rats nest out too. I have heard that is planned RBG is the very worst and would be first to go.
LikeLike
Seizing of assets has ,long been used against the good guys.
LikeLike
I’m too lazy to go back to the past thread a few months ago on the subject, but weren’t you one of the yeggs applauding Trump for the edict, saying it was the start of the cleansing he was going to do by hitting the miscreants in the pocketbook?
LikeLike
Why would they give aegis to the EXECUTIVE branch, then, if before this decision, aegis of ALL jurisdiction when to the Judicial branch?
If they wanted to keep control, they would have left the Constitution as is, with it’s current wording.
Or is the way Publius is reporting it bass-ackwards?
LikeLike
Aw, geez… as usual, since I wasn’t getting any straight answers, I went down the rabbit hole and read the damn decision myself.
As usual, big nuthin’ burger, and certainly nothing to do with any change of the current judicial system in re military justice and some nefarious plot to undermine future tribunals..
tl,dr version: The ruling changed NOTHING about the way the current system works, and no extra powers were taken from not given to the Executive branch.
Synopsis:
Some spic Airman got caught with child porn and exhausted his appeals, but tried for a Mulligan by arguing
a) an officer who was on one of the lower appeals boards shouldn’t have been allowed to sit on the next higher level appeals board simultaneously.
And after that didn’t cut any ice with the Supreme Court, his lawyer tried to argue that the highest board of appeals upon which civilians sit is technically part of the Executive branch, hence a violation of Article III.
Again, the Court ruled that this system has been in place for a long time, as approved by Congress, and because that appeals board judges individual cases for the military, its duties are indeed judiciary in nature and have nothing to do with an Executive exercise of power.
Hence, the system is no different after this ruling than before, and the challenge that it violates the Constitution was found without merit.
Judge Thomas himself even wrote a separate opinion elaborating his agreement with the decision. 7-2… and from what I read of the dissenting opinion, it struck me as heavy on the anecdotal rather than the sound legal precedent found in the ruling.
Anyone doubts this, read the judgment for yourself and waste 40 minutes like I did.
(((shakin’ mah haid)))
LikeLike
No all wrong. The point is the military is 100% executive under the President. Court called military courts “judicial-ish” so the civilian (((Court))) has FINAL last review over what military court does. Follow?
Read he entire dissents to understand. Military courts are supposed to be 100% for President to control the military.
LikeLike
It’s an anti-Presidential power decision.
It is judicial aggrandizement of executive powers. You have it backwards, Greg. Military courts already do what they do. Calling what they do “judicial” was so the civilian (((Court))) can have final review.
Final decision of JAG court supposed to be controlled BY THE PRESIDENT. Military is executive. Literally can be an Article III court. Read Alito dissent.
LikeLike
Can’t be article III court.
LikeLike
Greg little cases with stupid facts often contain stupid little parts that are bad for the future. This opinion has a few. It’s the civilian (((Court))) TAKING some of the EXECUTIVE power. Not “giving” sone judicial power to the military. Follow me?
Yes, military courts already did what they do and they give due process and act like courts. Just like all the 4th branch “deep state” administrative law judges. (Opinion discusses that bullshit too.)
The point is that literally THE POTUS, not the (((Court))), is supposed to have final review lower over what military court system does.
Military is war. President 100% controls. Soldiers waive right to civilian due process when enlisting.
The military, including all discipline, belongs to the President.
LikeLike
Tomato, to-mah-to…
Point is, as per the Constitution, the final say is in the hands of the Supreme Court, and ALL lower courts are under the aegis of the Judicial branch of gummint, no matter what technical or tenuous ties a particular lower court system may have to the Executive.
The checks-and-balances instituted at various steps between the branches are there for a reason, and as we see in this specific case, the Court upheld that the current system works as planned and is, indeed, constitutional.
That upper appeals court in the military system performs it’s duties in a judiciary manner and does not exercise Executive power, nor is it supposed to. And the fact that civilians sit on that bench in way undermines either military or president.
In short, nothing was changed, no powers taken nor added to the Executive branch.
If anything, if the plaintiff looking for yet another appeal had won, THAT would have meant the court in question would have to be taken completely out of the Executive aegis, such as it is, so the result you say happened was just the opposite.
LikeLike
Like it or not, Alito’s (and Gorsuch’s) was the minority opinion, 7-2.
Read Thomas’ agreement with the decision if you want to get wise on Constitutional law.
That said, I think things are a bit different when martial law is declared, so the Executive branch, with the backup of the physical Armed Forces, can trump (no pun intended) any court system during times of emergency.
LikeLike
Isn’t wikileaks controlled by the CIA now?
LikeLike
@Captain Obvious
this might make you feel better
http://theredelephants.com/doxxed-list-every-single-antifa-member-released-8chan/
LikeLike
Related– “Fat Acceptance” contributes to moar pigs and fatties in the world. In other news, water is wet. Of COURSE it does, you are normalizing degeneracy just like telling the weak minded wahmen that faggotry is a-ok and black men are peaceful loving scientists.
Like I said, children with tits. Nothing more.
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/science/2018/06/22/plus-size-clothing-overweight-models-may-fuel-obesity-epidemic/
LikeLiked by 1 person
stop dissing on kids. some boys have way more sense at 9 than their milfs at 29.
LikeLiked by 1 person
sum of leaky faucets: who was that?
Me: u don wanna kno
the cap of the pink taco: where are you right now?
Me: u don wanna kno
three pairs of lips and still no talking sense: what were you doing there?
Me: u don wanna kno
u don wanna kno is as golden as silence.
LikeLiked by 1 person
“K” is great too. Teetering the fine line between accepting and dismissing.
LikeLike
“oh, just an old russian friend” (then stare off into the distance with a smile only your face reminiscing the time. )
Later insert a comment about Russians giving good blow jobs.
LikeLike
I agree that “your competition” is a bit too transparent, and should maybe be reserved for girls with swollen egos, if at all.
OTOH, “just someone I know” may be a bit too dismissive, as if she’s just friends with you, like one of your buddies’ girlfriends or something.
I’m wondering about something a wee bit more suggestive like, “Oh yeah, she’s really nice” — basically, something to suggest that Other Girl is trying to seduce and reel you in and that you’re oblivious to her at the moment, but that you’re fully open to going there if she makes herself available.
LikeLiked by 2 people
if she makes herself available.
wrong
LikeLike
You mean, girls being super nice to you and making excuses to invite you over to their apartments is “wrong”? Could’ve fooled me…
LikeLiked by 1 person
If she’s an HB6.5 or greater: “Some creepy stalker chick who is intent on b!rthing my ch!ldren and won’t leave me alone. Although you gotta admire her work ethic.”
LikeLike
Why not just smirk and change the subject? Less is more.
LikeLike
Never trust a K*ke ! I thought Trump was smarter then this.
– Tom Arnold says he’s teaming up with Michael Cohen and ‘taking Trump down’ –
” Comedian Tom Arnold said Friday that he and President Trump’s former longtime personal lawyer are teaming up to “take down” the president. ”
http://thehill.com/blogs/in-the-know/393598-tom-arnold-cohen-and-i-are-teaming-up-to-take-trump-down
LikeLike
Tom Arnold couldn’t take down Roseanne’s pants.
LikeLike
HOLY SHIT, you guys wanna see a smokeshow? Look up Ricky Schroder’s daughter. Talk about preserving your race. Hopefully she doesn’t go native.
LikeLike
I am running a variation on this routine.
There are two girlz at the orifice. Both in junior positions (although I’ve other positions for them in mind), early 20s. One is a standard thot, with straightened blonde hair with various foil highlights and extensions. Heavy makeup, pastel jeans, black nail polish. Slight tummy going but would be a wonderful romp. Second is less remarkable but great body (just not as made up as the other one).
I have this thing going where I said I’m not friends with either of them (girlz think everyone at work are friends). One of them started saying “can we pleeeeease be friends” and I say “nope, acquaintance at best,”
I then start to call the other one my friend in front of the other and refer to the other in the third person as if she’s not in the room. Another day, I’ll reverse the roles, often doing the third-person thing. That drives them crazy like little school girls getting teased.
Am I banging either of them? No, but it’s entertaining and probably getting me closer to banging than any one of the boring guys making polite small talk with them.
There’s also the pound metoo thing going on which certainly puts a chill on things.
(A major Canadian winemaker was taken down/meetoo’d today), I may write something about that also.
LikeLike
Toying with girls in the workplace is particularly fun because poundmetoo has made most betas scared to even stand too close to female colleagues. Not an argument for shitting where you eat and those risk are hella real but its fun to get the bantz on. You know who she’ll be hanging around with at the company Christmas party.
LikeLike
Resetting the scale.
– Plus-size clothing and overweight models are normalising obesity, warn experts –
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/science/2018/06/22/plus-size-clothing-overweight-models-may-fuel-obesity-epidemic/
LikeLike
https://www.msn.com/en-nz/news/world/pope-francis-every-country-should-welcome-as-many-refugees-as-possible/ar-AAz26l3?ocid=spartandhp
The pope doing his globohomo bit. No mention of consulting the people’s of the countries he wants to take in refugees, just talking to their ruler governments. No problem lying that the refugees are fleeing war when most aren’t. Jiust a piece of shit in a dress.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Mod is brutal.
LikeLike
i believe the Vatican has a nice big wall around it. You first, your popeness.
LikeLike
OT but important to note
http://dailycaller.com/2018/06/22/mexican-candidate-immigration-speech/
globohomo strikes again
LikeLike
This mod. I recommend a book called “Furies” by Lauro Martinis, a history of the European wars from 1450 to 1700. You can find it online. Relevance?
The papacy and the rulers have always been at brutal w@r with their own people. It is profitable. They have no racial consciousness. They always import m3rcenary throngs to k1ll and displace populations. The same people rule in Europe today as ruled then.
LikeLike
Yes cuckolics are as bad as Jews.
LikeLike
The next step down the red pill hole for many of you: all (((Christianity))) IS LITERALLY THE ULTIMATE ANTIWHITE CUCK. Who still doesn’t understand that? Simply READ the Bible.
Abrahamic tribal bullshit, and semites, literally, is what got us to everything about which we complain here, from feminism to the Federal Reserve to nonstop global war to antiwhite miscegenation propaganda to harmful misplaced cuck pathological altruism.
Whites were literally jewed into calling a Jew God. No wonder they laugh at us.
Most modern Christians don’t even pretend to understand anything resembling what it says in the Bible. Saw a redneck Christian billboard: “Learn why Jesus made you.” Hardeehar. The Bible does not come close to saying that Jesus IS the God who did the creating.
Also the Pope wears weird demonic outfits.
LikeLike
Hey guys, i’ve a few questions regarding game:
a) is it a generally GOOD idea if u ask a girl to hold camera vs you hold the camera when talking selfie
b) what’d u respond if a girl asks u who’s that girl? normally i say i just wanted to protect her privacy when i blurred her face
c) blurred her face vs non blurred face, which one raises more curiousity thanks
LikeLike
WTF is this sh!t?
Phuckerbergbook Game?
LikeLike
Now now… Phuckerbergbook ain’t all bad. It’s a nice, easy way to find out which of your plates knows or doesn’t know which of your other plates. lzoozlzozlz
LikeLike
https://www.politico.com/magazine/story/2018/06/22/trump-millennial-supporters-washington-dc-218833
100% truth from a lefty rag. They don’t even hide the animosity and hate the poor young bastards in DC face on the regular. That liberal tolerance is just so incredible. I weep for young guys trying to run game in this city, harder than it has ever been.
LikeLike
See the miscegenation in the cartoon? Front and center and another on the right.
Masks way off.
LikeLike
J00 gets fired from Netflix for using the ‘N’ Word http://freerepublic.com/focus/f-chat/3665438/posts
LikeLike
I think so women will be jealous even if the other woman is not beautiful. More women realize beauty is not everything so they will try to understand what the other woman posseses that she does not. For sure it the other woman is more beautiful it will be more easy to understand, but even if the other woman is ugly the woman’s self esteem will take serious suffering.
LikeLike