Posted on 02/19/2020 2:56:07 PM PST by Kaslin
STACEY ABRAMS WRITES STEAMY ROMANCE NOVELS — HERE ARE THE RAUNCHIEST EXCERPTS
Scott Morefield | Daily Caller Reporter, 11/03/2018
Georgia Democratic gubernatorial candidate Stacey Abrams is a steamy romance novelist. From 2001 to 2009, Abrams produced eight books under the pseudonym Selena Montgomery. She claimed to have sold over 100,000 copies and to have won several awards for her writing. The Federalist posted several steamy passages from Abrams’ work.
(Beware, they contain explicit sexual content.)
From “Secrets and Lies” (2006): He thrust deep, control broken, shattered. Again and again, deeper and hotter and further than fantasy. With urgency, she accepted him, fascinated by the power, and for a moment, she wavered, wondering if she was prepared. In the next second, she knew she could never be.Kat moved beneath him, her body too full to stay motionless. Theirs mouths coupled, imitating the dance that frenzied her limbs, wrapping her into him. Sebastian flew above her, driven to claim and imprint himself forever. He nuzzled her breast, finding the wild beats, and pressed a kiss just there, sealing his fate.
From “Reckless” (2009):‘Love me,’ he demanded, taking her up once more. Afraid she did, Kell kissed him, a merger that spoke words she wasn’t ready to say aloud. Arousal, ravenous and craven, bent to a stronger, more fragile need that consumed her. She opened for him, and he plunged inside, dragging her to him. The rhythm caught them both, drove them to demand then offer. Endlessly, wonderfully, they fell into the greedy darkness and fought to give more than either could have imagined. An explosion, his, hers, theirs, brought twin cries and release.
You’re the classist and the racist, Stacey.
Has this dummy ever heard of the DNC and their system of SUPER DELEGATES??? At least the electoral college only allocates ONE vote per elector. The stupid and the cognitively dissonant is strong with DEMONRATS......
In California, folks have discussed this. For a bigger state, my thought
wouldn't be as fitting, but in a smaller state it would seem to me to dilute
that state's ability to have a bigger voice.
If you had ten small states and their combined total was 70 electoral votes,
wouldn't that be better than a combined 30/40 split between the candidates?
Wouldn't you have essentially cancelled out the full impact of the Electoral
College to give them a big voice?
I will admit it could stop California from that massive 54 Electoral Vote
windfall to just one candidate too though.
These are the ravings of an idiot.
‘Afraid she did, Kell kissed him, a merger that spoke words she wasn’t ready to say aloud. Arousal, ravenous and craven, bent to a stronger, more fragile need that consumed her.’
yeesh, that’s terrible writing...
And that idiot might be VP for a while
No, it’s just the opposite!
Get that gap between your toofs fixed chubby
That would be Stacey Abrams Dada.
the major problem with EV’s is the way they are allocated; winner take all except for ME and NE...the votes should be divvied up in each state by congressional district, so as to give voice to all the residents in the state...
While California is an issue because of how close it gets a candidate in one lump, moderate-sized lumps require candidates spread out their appeal. It makes it MORE likely any individual’s vote counts and matters.
The stupid is strong with this one
She’s got all the answers she knows everything, why nobody asks her it’s a mystery to me.l
‘Wouldn’t you have essentially cancelled out the full impact of the Electoral College to give them a big voice?’
perhaps; but the important thing to remember winner take all was not mandated by the Constitution; instead, it first came to majority status in the election of 1824, when JQ Adams lost both popular and EC to Jackson, but struck a deal in the House to steal the election...it was done in order for ‘preferred’ candidates to prevail, and once certain states had started it, others had to follow so as not to lose influence...it’s primary disadvantage is that it zeroes out wide swaths of voter intent...
‘It makes it MORE likely any individual’s vote counts and matters.’
huh...? how does a voter in any CD have his vote matter more by being zeroed out because the state mandates the prevailing party win the state’s EV’s...?
Because of course she does!
Surprising.
Said nobody Evah!
She is definitely 5/3 a human
Think of the large swath of voters voices cancelled out in a straight
general election match-up.
She is for gun grabbing, wonder what these brothers would think about that?
In spite of millions of illegal votes cast Trump won.
Ergo, the system is broken.
Yeah, I can see exactly how she reached that conclusion. What I don't see is why democrats are damn near universally unable to realize that people no longer believe the democrat lie machine.
Of course, I've never understood why they call it "taking a crap" instead of "leaving a crap" so maybe it's just me.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.