Ah! Master Husband got his kinky wish! We finally had a nice rainy day yesterday, and Maste and his slave got to test out her brand new BRIGHT RED raincoat. As ordered she wore nothing underneth. As promised Master made sure it was such, it is 100% waterproof, so this slave was quite happy with it! Also, if this slave gets lost or falls into a ravine, the search and rescue team will have no trouble finding the slave. "cheery thoughts" This jacket is seriously seriously bright. And does glow in the dark and so light and slightly transparent when dry. We had a great rainy-day dog walk in the woods. Master said his slave was funny in the rain, this slave likes the outdoors time, but she doesn't like it if the rain gets in her hair or on her neck - so she points them backwards in a really cute way. Stevie Wonder does care at all - Master said his slave just comes to life in the woods. It's really beautiful.

Islam : peaceful indeed......Cartoon protest leader guilty of soliciting murder

Islam = peaceful indeed......Cartoon protest leader guilty of soliciting murder

Muslims protest in London after the publication of cartoons depicting the prophet Muhammad in Danish and French newspapers. Photograph: Ian Langsdon/EPA

A leader of a demonstration in protest against cartoons of the prophet Mohammed published in Danish newspapers was yesterday convicted at the Old Bailey of soliciting murder and inciting racial hatred.

Umran Javed, 27, of Birmingham, was found guilty yesterday of soliciting murder and stirring up racial hatred during a demonstration outside the Danish embassy in Knightsbridge, west London, in February last year.

The protest had been called following publication of a number of cartoons in Denmark which portrayed Mohammed in various unflattering forms. The original protesters were later joined by between 200 and 300 others, who had marched from the Regent's Park mosque.

Police monitoring the demonstration took video footage of the protesters and Javed was arrested later after more than 100 complaints had been made by members of the public. The court was told that Javed had used a loud hailer to address around 40 other demonstrators.

"He appeared to be one of the leaders," prosecuting counsel David Perry QC told the jury. "He addressed the crowd in terms which encouraged killing and incited racial hatred ... He said Denmark would pay with blood."

He was also alleged to have shouted: "Bomb, bomb Denmark. Bomb, bomb USA." Mr Perry said the crowd responded to his calls with similar calls and chants.

Mr Perry told the jury that the case was not about the issues of freedom of assembly or freedom of speech. The words used were plainly criminal, he said.

Earlier, Javed told the jury: "I regret saying these things. I understand the implications they have, but they were just slogans, soundbites. I did not want to see Denmark and the USA being bombed."

There were angry scenes in the public gallery as the verdicts were announced and Javed was remanded in custody for sentencing in April.

The conviction was attacked last night by Muslim activists who said that a fair trial was not possible in the current climate in Britain. They said that the demonstrators had merely been expressing their anger and not literally calling for murder.

The cartoons were not published in the United Kingdom but have since appeared in publications in France and are available on the internet.


Watch the youtube video http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=X2epvSAGuLc and this one: The Dark Side of Prophet http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oPjVCwec6oQ&feature=related ehhh! religion is disguising...including Christianity....ugggg!!! http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0MbdiXxJWRI&feature=related http://youtu.be/lj3Su3BGIAI disgusting

Wednesday, September 9, 2009

What kind of people is Collarme Made up of?

What is cm made up of? Let's see... 85 - 90% males........or contains roughly 60% males (Doms), 20% male subs including 10 to 15% of them pretending to be female subs.. 1 or 2% are female (subs including lesbians) 2%female dommes. 4 % gay males (doms and subs). 1%lesbian females ( dommes and subs). .. 5% either/or unknown, trans, etc. It is just a guess so for those that like to be critical, dont thats not what your here for.

Now I do believe that out of the 60% Male Doms that about 90% either are wannabe Doms or pretend to be experienced Doms at leaset they think and say they are but haven't gotten a clue what it takes to be a Dom....My Husband calls them slow typists...(people with one hand on the keyboard and the other one on the you know what)..... A few fakes/bots/flakes/retards will always make it through.

I also believe that out of the 2% Subs that about 70% are not really true and are experimenting or part time...seeking fun..but would never want to get involved in RT with a dom..the other 20% are the fakes/bots/flakes/retards, dont ask me why this is so different but it is.the remaining 10% are true subs and slaves that do seek a life.

The other 5% well honestly they are just there and probably happy doing whatever it is they are here to do.

So if you have read this far your probably asking what the fuck is this slave talking about. Well here it goes short and sweet. You are either a Dom/Sub/Switch, say it mean it and realize we are all here to learn/play and have fun. If you think your going to find "The One" it could happen but odds are it will not, however give it a shot and see.

Guess what I am saying is, damn realize what this site is for and about, meet some people have some fun and if it goes further great if not, had fun lessons learned so fourth and so on.

Monday, September 7, 2009

My take on Collarme users.

What is cm made up of? Let's see... contains roughly 60% males (Doms), 20% male subs including 5% of them pretending to be female subs.. 6% are female (subs including lesbians) 2%female dommes. 4 % gay males (doms and subs). 4%lesbian females ( dommes and subs). .. 5% either/or unknown, trans, etc. It is just a guess so for those that like to be critical, dont thats not what your here for.

I also believe cm is made up of 70% Republicans....and more than half of who would proudly claim they are about family values and would stick to ethics....claim there is too much sex on t.v, movies. About BDSM? What is BDSM?, what D/s, or Master/Slave games....was that not outlawed in the U.S? ...(giggle...Yes...Republicans...You are two faced bigots...if not outright mornons)

Now I do believe that out of the 60% Male Doms that about 90% either are wannabe Doms or pretend to be experienced Doms atleaset they think and say they are. A few fakes/bots/flakes/retards will always make it through.

I also believe that out of the 6% female subs about 70% are not really true and are experimenting or part time...seeking fun...the other 20% are the fakes/bots/flakes/retards, dont ask me why this is so different but it is.the remaining 10% are true subs and slaves that do seek a life.

The other 5% well honestly they are just there and probably happy doing whatever it is they are here to do.

So if you have read this far your probably asking what the hell is this gal talking about. Well here it goes short and sweet. You are either a Dom/Sub/Switch, say it mean it and realize we are all here to learn/play and have fun. If you think your going to find "The One" it could happen but odds are it will not, however give it a shot and see.

Sunday, July 26, 2009

The Grand Old Party of Racism

Once upon a time, there was the party of Lincoln. It was devoted to the idea of emancipation and 40 acres and a mule. Over the last 150 years, how times have changed. Today, in order to secure their electoral base, the Republican party has lowered itself to the lowest common denominator of its rabid base. It has become the Grand Old Party of racism.

Since the Southern strategy became the bread and butter of Republican electoral politics, a key shift happened in the party. As new (more Southern) elements gained power in the party, racism began rearing its ugly head from time to time. The most toxic of these outbreaks was the Louisiana politician, David Duke. A former Grand Wizard of the KKK, he ran semi-successful candidacies for the House (1989), the Senate (1990), governor of Louisiana (1991) and president (1992). While much of the national party repudiated Duke’s racism, his ability to collect votes in Louisiana pointed to a demographic and a fact just beneath the surface of the Republican Party.

At the heart of the base (especially in Southern states) people with predominantly racist beliefs form the core of the party that Republicans rely on to get elected.

In recent years, the American electorate has basically broken itself down into thirds. About 25% of the electorate is liberal/progressive and about 35% of the electorate identifies as hard-core Republican/conservative. The remaining 40% or so occupy the mushy middle of non-ideologues, independents, libertarians, greens, and others. 40% might seem high, but that mushy middle has a tendency not to come out to vote. They are notoriously unpredictable. For much of the 1980s and 1990s, Republican electoral strategy was pretty simple. To win elections all you had to do was get out your base, and focus on enough single, hot-button social issues to swing key constituencies who might be found in that mushy middle. For example, you might go for the Catholic vote by focusing on abortion. Additionally, Republican strategists also tended to focus on negative advertising as a means of voter suppression. If middle-of-the-road voters were not breaking your candidate’s way, you could always swing enough mud to turn those voters (who were not very likely to vote anyway) off. Meanwhile, Democrats would have to both excite their base and manage to pull enough of those 40% to get a plurality.

While favorable for many years, the demographics began to slip away from Republicans after 2000. Primarily in Southern states, Hispanics have become the new force to deal with in politics as the Hispanic population in the U.S. has soared.
Enter Karl Rove. Rove’s strategy was quite smart. He took into account the growing Hispanic nature of the electorate and chose to directly address them in Bush’s 2000 campaign. His improved slice of the Hispanic pie (35%) was just enough to help push him over the top in several key states in 2000, especially Florida. In 2004, Bush did even better with national security dominating the campaign. That year, Bush managed to get around 44% of the vote. But then, the bottom dropped out for Republicans with the Hispanic community. What happened?

The answer to that question is simple. In June of 2007, Bush’s Immigration bill, which would have established a path to citizenship for up to 12 million illegal aliens in the country, went down to ignominious defeat, largely at the hands of conservatives in his own party. Key conservative senators, such as Jim DeMint (R-SC) and John Cornyn (R-TX) led the charge. Bush’s "Big Tent" had been scorched just in time for the 2008 elections. When all the dust had settled on the McCain campaign, he managed to receive only 31% of the Hispanic vote. Obama was able to pull together a powerful coalition of minorities, liberals, and people in the middle who simply wanted a change in the country’s direction. Obama easily won election as he managed to flip key states like Florida, North Carolina and Virginia from red to blue. However, in massive defeat, the Republican party didn’t change course. Instead, Republicans at the state level got involved in the process and Arizona passed a “show me your papers” immigration bill that pushed even more Hispanics into the D column. The Republicans were facing electoral apocalypse. So, what to do?

Unfortunately for them, the solution will most likely be their undoing. Since 2008, Republican party strategy has shifted to give the nativist, "know-nothing," bigoted wing of the Republican party exactly what they want. In primary after primary, they have pushed the extremist candidates of choice. Rebranded as the Tea Party movement and endowed by the wealthy supporters of Republican think tanks, they have systematically purged the Republican party of any moderation. In 2010, the new Republican strategy became clear. First, your base must over-perform in the polls. You do this by giving them red meat in the form of concessions and an enemy in the form of President Obama (more on this later). Second, you take advantage of a ruling (Citizens United) by your bought-and-paid-for Supreme Court that allows corporations to dump unlimited money on campaigns. You use that advantage to suppress Democratic votes in any way possible, be that hiring thugs to scream at town hall meetings, or massive negative campaign buys. The result was rather predictable: in an off-year election (2010), when moderates are less likely to vote, the Republicans managed to gain control of Congress. The trouble is that now their strategy is locked in for 2012.

In 2012, no Republican who significantly disagrees with the base will come close to being nominated. What’s worse, the concert of racism that was once conducted with dog whistles is now out in the open. It is slowly exposing itself as the racist strategy that it is. Since 2008, Republicans at all levels have used the Obama birth certificate as a code word for race. It gave birth (pardon the pun) to the weaselly argument of, “I take him at his word, but people have raised questions.” Time and time again we heard this talking point from the Republican leadership. Tea Party leaders, like Rep. Michelle Bachmann (R-MN), were even more open with their doubts about what President Obama was trying to hide.
Enter Donald Trump. Over the last month, Mr. Trump has managed to stir up huge free publicity on this non-issue to help put forward the central idea of his non-campaign for president. When not challenging the president’s nationality, Trump has been busy touting his, “great relationship with the blacks.” Trump's constant verbal diarrhea merely reveals what has been there all along: the attacks on President Obama and his birth certificate were always about race.

While you might dismiss Trump as a “barker” for the Tea Party sideshow as President Obama so eloquently described the situation, the Grand Old Party of racism just keeps rolling along. State by state, the Koch Brothers, ALEC and other groups have been systematically pushing their racist agenda. Across the nation (Florida, Wisconsin, North Carolina and other states) Republican legislatures have all put forward curiously similar bills, all designed to make it harder to vote. For example, in Florida, those most likely to move by demographic are the poor and minorities. The bill would make it much more difficult for registration groups to work with these individuals, even leaving non-partisan groups like the League of Women Voters thinking they will have to suspend voter drives under the threat of fines. With more people voting provisional ballots (of which only 48% were counted across the country in last fall’s election), voter suppression is a certainty as voters forgo the long lines created by the shortening of early voting.

In Oklahoma, the mask has completely fallen off and Republican legislators seem to be empowered these days to say exactly how they feel.

Upon the passing of legislation to put Affirmative Action up to a vote by the electorate, Rep. Sally Kern (R-Oklahoma City) decided to let it all hang out. In an interview with the Tulsa World she said, “Minorities earn less than white people because they don’t work as hard and have less initiative.” She went on to add that, “We have a high percentage of blacks in prison, and that’s tragic, but are they in prison just because they are black or because they don’t want to study as hard in school? I’ve taught school, and I saw a lot of people of color who didn’t study hard because they said the government would take care of them.”

The GOP needs to ask itself if they still want to be the party of Lincoln. Right now, they are looking an awful lot like the party of David Duke and ‘Bull’ Connor.

Article Author: Jerald Cumbus

Jerald Cumbus is a professor, administrator, blogger, political activist, writer, poet, blogger and critic. Originally from Florida, he now works and resides in the United Arab Emirates. A long-time blogger, he was an early member of the Democratic …

Saturday, July 25, 2009

What is the Hanky Code?

What is the Hanky Code?: "The hanky code is a signaling system used by gay men and members of the fetish and BDSM communities to indicate sexual preference. Signals in the hanky code are conveyed by wearing a handkerchief of a specific color or pattern in either the right or left back pocket, conveying preference to anyone in the vicinity who is familiar with the concept of the hanky code. While wearing a hanky, someone is said to be “flagging,” and the hanky code is known as flagging, the bandanna code, or the handkerchief code.

Some people have suggested that the basics of the hanky code may go as far back to the 1800s, when men in isolated regions of the American West would wear red handkerchiefs to indicate that they were willing to take a woman's role in a dance. However, this is probably apocryphal, and has never been verified. More solidly, the seeds for the hanky code appear to have been sown in the 1970s, when gay men first started wearing handkerchiefs according to guidelines published in The Village Voice, a newspaper in New York City."

There are a number of advantages to the hanky code which explain why it endures to this day. In the 1970s, when the gay community was less outspoken, the hanky code allowed gay men to communicate with each other without attracting attention, and allowed men to more easily scope out potential dates. In communities where the hanky code was prevalent, men knew that pursuing men who weren't flagging could be risky, and they could seek out partners on the basis of preference by checking their back pockets.

This code also turned out to be handy in crowded environments like gay bars, where the noise and crowd could make it hard to establish a connection with someone. As the hanky code spread in the gay community, it began to be picked up more generally in the fetish and BDSM communities, and complex permutations of colors, patterns, and placements began to proliferate.

As a general rule, someone who flags in the left pocket indicates that he or she is a top, while someone who flags in the right pocket is a bottom. Bottoms prefer to participate as recipients in sexual and fetish encounters, while tops prefer just the opposite.

Knowing about the hanky code can be useful if you are traveling to an area with a large queer or fetish-oriented population, as you might unwittingly send out a signal if you leave a handkerchief in your back pocket. However, many people rely on other social cues beyond the hanky code; if you happen to have, for example, a gray handkerchief in your right pocket while innocently riding the subway, you are unlikely to be ravaged by eager bondage tops, although someone might approach with a courteous introduction.

Wednesday, June 24, 2009

Republican Fairytales.

Just as disturbing as spreading lies is the ClusterFox/Republican meme that all Muslims are terrorists. The GOP is being exposed for being the purveyors of hate and lies, based on this poll. However, their being busted in one unscientific poll does not eliminate the damage they’ve already done, nor the havoc they’re trying to create.

Monday, June 22, 2009

Come on B.S. with Jesus - Pastors will moderate = Virginia Attorney General Ken Cuccinelli

In Virginia, Attorney General Ken Cuccinelli is exploring the limits of when preaching crosses over the line into politics. It requires a bit of digging into state law, but the line he identifies looks fairly clearly, at least at first glance.
Attorney General Ken Cuccinelli spoke to the approximately 250 church leaders on Thursday, outlining for them what they are allowed to do when it comes to political engagement.
A personal endorsement of a candidate is permissible under the law, he said at the Virginia Christian Alliance’s “Christian Citizenship and Godly Government Breakfast.” But they cannot use their church to endorse anyone.
“The biggest no-no of them all, do not put your church’s name behind any candidate,” he made clear as he pointed out that churches that endorse candidates could lose their 501(c)3 tax exempt status.
If we stopped there, it sounds like the AG is pulling out the separation of church and state argument with guns blazing. However, he goes on to put a few more qualifiers on this which come close to the exact opposite.
Churches may also distribute voter guides explaining the issue positions of candidates, as long as those guides do not also contain the positions of the church on those issues.
Cuccinelli assured the pastors, though, that speaking out on political issues is not only legal, but appropriate.
“When you became a pastor, you didn’t leave your First Amendment rights at the door,” he clarified. “Continue to be good shepherds to your congregations – and don’t be afraid when your shepherding includes giving guidance on issues that fall in the political world, because those are the same issues your congregants face each day in their world. Let your voice be heard. Speak out and guide your flock toward what is right and what is true.”
You’ll pardon me for observing that the Attorney General, speaking in his official capacity, isn’t sounding particularly secular there. But in any event, he’s not exactly breaking new ground. This is one of the biggest gray areas in the country when it comes to the intersection of politics and faith.
On the one hand, it’s not difficult to imagine that when your pastor hands out an “issues guide” reinforcing the church’s position on each item, it doesn’t exactly require a double major in theology and political science to put two and two together and figure out which candidate is which. But does that cross the line in terms of non-profits – including churches – staying out of elections?
That depends which state you’re in. Without re-writing a single law, one state could choose to bring the hammer down when the leader of the congregation so much as mentions the word abortion. Across the state line, the next governor could have policies allowing priests to do anything, providing their not actually handing out “Vote for Bob” bumper stickers along with the communion wafers.
The real question to be wrestled to the ground here is, when is influence undue and when is it appropriate? On the one hand, the entire purpose of structured religion is, in part, to influence your behavior. (At least as far as influencing you to lead a moral life.) Surely the way you vote is part of how you interact with the rest of the world and conduct your affairs.
But contrarians will note that religious leaders carry influence beyond what any single adviser or guide could wield, since they implicitly carry the fate of your eternal soul in their hands. Should that level of what is literally “the fear of god” influence be brought to bear on voters’ decisions? This will raise the usual hackles on both sides of the debate, but don’t expect any clarification from on high any time soon. In fact, it will continue to swirl as events like the Texas “Day of Prayer” make the news.

Sunday, June 21, 2009

Study: Liberal brains bigger in areas dealing with complexity, conservative brains bigger in area of fear

Liberals have more gray matter in a part of the brain associated with understanding complexity, while the conservative brain is bigger in the section related to processing fear, said the study on Thursday in Current Biology.

Tuesday, February 9, 2010

Do you want another Bush as President? Fuck the Republicans!

Monday, January 4, 2010

BDSM Events calender - requested to post here as a public service message by MasterClarion.

BDSM Event Calendar

2010

Thursday, November 12, 2009

Singing nude in the rain.......