This one
This one is not plump enough Back to the feeding cage!
(Pope Benedict XVI)
picture: dunno source, via our lol builder. lol caption: oldgrimm
Show Only: Democrats | Republicans | Media | Military
« Previous OMG!! | itz cool Next »
» 123 comments
-
Recent Comments
The Amazing Rando on RAINBOWS librarianchat on Giggity Giggity clueless on RAINBOWS mabsba on RAINBOWS librarianchat on RAINBOWS gregor on How to Reinforce One’s I… Jane St.Clair; also … on RAINBOWS Charles on MRE Default User on RAINBOWS Default User on RAINBOWS 
Cheezburger Network Blog
Yay mephistophilese(sp?) worshiping pope!
Mephistopheles. :3
And yes. XD
I can has a bite pls?
oh, great. a magnet post for ever anti-Catholic fundy and lefty.
You’re right, the Catholic church has never made or supported posters or slogans against any other groups. We really should just leave them alone.
um yeah… I liked Pope John Paul II. He was a good Pope. This guy fails horribly. Last time I checked, lying to an entire country by telling them the “condoms are not effective at stopping the spread of HIV?AIDS” is something that is not only horribly wrong and immoral, but is also inadvertently committing murder. I am a Christian BTW so don’t bitch about me being some sort of Catholic-hating Atiest, not that i have anything against athiests just don’t push it on me and i wont push my religion on you.
We have gone from a Holocaust survivor, to an ex-Hitler youth.
Here is an atheist bitching at you because you are a truth-twisting moron:
Yes, young Ratzinger was compulsorily enrolled in the Hitler Youth following his 14th birthday — as all other pupils of the catholic school that he attended. His family and other background was definitely not sympathetic to Nazism.
And, BTW, was John Paul II’s policy on condoms and AIDS any different?
HMMM Ok, John Paul II didn’t say anything about condoms to people in Africa. and he definatly didn’t oppose them if they saved lives over there which is why he never lied to them.
And as for the Hitler Youth thing, most Germans of the time became sympathetic to Nazism. And yes the Hitler Youth wasn’t the SS but its still pretty bad. Plus look at Pope Pius II(i think its too). Talk about someone who decided not to oppose Hitler. This guy practically supported him.
Really?
The Vatican’s stand on condoms and AIDS under John Paul II:
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A29404-2005Jan22.html
http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2003/oct/09/aids
And I reckon you yourself don’t want to be judged from characteristics of others…
So why do you do it with others?
http://bc.edu/research/cjl/meta-elements/texts/cjrelations/topics/new_pope_defied_nazis.htm
http://www.nationalcatholicreporter.org/word/word101405.htm#five
And what does Pope Pius II has to do with this?
Get your facts straight.
You really are a self-righteous babe with no idea on what it means to live under a dictatorship.
Most of us were not sympathetic to Nazism. In fact, most were only loyal for fear of death to themselves or their loved ones. We were lucky enough to be third generation Aussie Americans by this time. Some of the rest of our family was not. I’m 7th gen American, and stories are still told. Many of you have no clue, to put it simply.
Jadebullet, get your facts straight. For example, google “John Paul AIDS Ccondom” and look for Pope Benedict on Wikipedia.
And in Nazi Germany, you would probably have toppled the government single-handedly or at least would have died trying, right?
Who would EVER google a pope’s name and something that envelops the penis? I mean really, why would you even WANT to see the resulting pictures for that?
“We have gone from a Holocaust survivor, to an ex-Hitler youth.”
Wow, I’ve never heard it put better!
Agreed!
Shit, really? Do you meet people who use words much?
Troll much?
Yes and Saul was a persecutor of Christians before he became Paul. Oh people can’t change I guess.
Chances of not getting aids while wearing a condom are better, but it’s not 100% effective. The difference in size between the HIV virus and the microscopic holes present in all condoms would make it like throwing a dime through a basket ball hoop. From a strictly pragmatic point of view, he wasn’t totally wrong.
An interesting post. All you need now is the truth.
It’s not enough to say something is wrong. Can you provide evidence to the contrary?
Actually, this was pretty much exactly the standpoint of the Vatica under John Paul II.
Um, dime in a basketball hoop? You’re saying the aids virus is very likely to be transmitted through a condom when you say that, which is flat out wrong. There’s a reason doctors use latex gloves, etc, because contamination through latex is virtually impossible, and when using a latex condom correctly, they are over 99 % effective.
You are over-reading. I did not say it was likely, nor would I have attempted to imply it. I said they were not 100% effective. I am not made up of opinions. In a very pragmatic sense, only 99% effective makes the Pope 1% right (ergo: not ‘totally wrong’). Provided they use latex ,and not natural membrane condoms (only 90% effective), or female condoms (34% effective, and the most popular form in Africa among professional women), then they can have sex with someone carrying the virus and be 99% sure you won’t contract it. I say only what I mean, and I mean what I say. I don’t imply. But, thank you for calling me out. It did force me to re-examine my source; a habit I sometimes need to be reminded to enforce. The size difference statistic applies to natural membrane condoms only. But, in the future, please don’t presume to tell me what I’m saying.
lol mccain is old
It’s your moronic, non-funny “joke” that’s old. It’s tired. It’s done. It’s more over then the “In Soviet Russia” jokes. Please get a new one. How about “NickDigger is an unfunny putz” or “LOL I’m a loser.”
mccain is old ROFL XD
there how’s that?
still crappy
SOMEBODY is a LIIIIIIITTLE cranky.
OK, McCain is old is getting…well…old. I can agree.
But In Soviet Russia jokes are still effin’ funny.
Won’t be nearly as funny in the next decade.
SOME of them are still funny. Like any other joke, you gotta do it right or else it’s a fail.
But Soviet Russia doesn’t exist anymore. Therefore the jokes are obsolete. I mean, if you’re going to do Comunism jokes, do it based on a country that still lives under that regeime, like China.
Hehehe…..He said McCain is old *giggle-snort*
Dear Pope Benedict,
Your hat is so very, very stupid.
With some respect in other regards,
Robinhoo
When did the pope start frequenting gay, cowboy themed bars?
LOLHAT.
Ouch. Let the flame wars begin.
Ahh, the Liberals. Full of Hate and intolerance to everyone else not like them…
You must be joking. You can’t possibly be saying that Conservatives are an icon of tolerance.
Conservatives are much more tolerant than liberals.
Liberals hate anyone who doesn’t adhere to their ideology. Conservatives know that others have a right to be different.
Liberals also hate people based on their race, gender and sexuality. Men, white people, heterosexuals, Christians — there are many categories for liberal hatred.
I know many liberals who fit into all those categories. Conservatives preach hatred and racial/religious intolerance. Ever been to a NASCAR race? Those are the people who kept George W. Bush in office for a second term.
Many liberals hate themselves. That’s their problem.
I see you hate people who go to NASCAR races too. What a bigot you are.
It’s obvious you believe your own propaganda far too much, so I’ll just leave you to wallow in your own self delusion.
Heh. Talk about projection.
Yes, fine. Congratulations on your “win”. Make sure you tell your grandkids about it.
Thought you were going to leave me to wallow in my own self delusion?
How about we just agree to disagree and leave it at that. See, liberals CAN believe people have the right to be different.
Only when you don’t have the power to censor opposing views.
Now who’s being intolerant?
Which liberals are you talking about EP? I can’t think of many liberals with censorship powers.
And you appear to be confused on what a liberal is. Liberalism is tied to the sexual revolution, women’s liberation and free markets. Liberalism is about supporting maximum individual freedoms, that is freedom of speech,
religion and all that stuff.
In this respect, I am not completely liberal. I don’t support complete freedom of religion. I don’t think that religions like the KKK and other dangerous cults, should be allowed to exist.
Also, more like modern American ‘liberals’ rather than classic liberalism, I don’t fully support free markets. There should infrastructure set up to
guarantee all people have access to free education and free healthcare.
PiMan
Fairness Doctrine.
Nuff said.
Trainwreck: How does Reagen eviscerating the FD to redundancy have to do with “Liberal” censorship?
Or is it because of that whole “Freedom of Speech shall not be infringed unless such freedom leads to clear and present danger or the presence of evl” being interpreted as openly hostile hate speech?
Or that too many lefties feel that if you’re going to have a station of pundits and “entertainers”, they should not be doing so under the banner of “News Journalism”?
Herb
The fact that one inactted nothing would change on the current CNN, NBC and ABC networks, and FOX and Talk Radio would be forced to speak about the other side, even though they are a business and have a right to talk about it (darnit, I forgot, does business have freedom of speech rights or no? Their was a case on it and I forgot)
It would only effect the areas that the enacters of the FD consider ‘right wing’. It would not change into balance, it would be conformity. Secondly I haven’t heard one conservative consider it a good idea, which means to me that it seems to be one sided idea. Mrs. Speaker and Ted Kennedy would LOVE to see the FD enacted and apply it soley to talk radio and FOX. They’d have to force themselves NOT to put Rush Limbau and Shawn Hannitys name.
I find desire to revive the FD a little one sided don’t you?
Ohhhhh.. I see what you did there
::thumbs up::
Did you want some cheese with that?
Seriously? Does anyone else think this line of reasoning is both absurd and naive? Liberals hate conservatives and conservatives hate liberals. Right? Why? I don’t recall every reading in any manual why this should happen. No one has a monopoly on respect for those different from you. To think that whatever side of the spectrum you identify with is correct in their absolute views is just stupid, or as i mentioned, naive. Take you pick. Liberal or conservative, lets further break things down into respectable, morally grounded, intelligent people and the moronic, absolutist hate mongers.
Is it called being tolerant when a conservative goes on a shooting spree in east tennesee churches because the churche’s views are too liberal for his liking?
Men, white people, heterosexuals and Christians (and other false categories) are doing all right for themselves though really, aren’t they
We can all agree that no party holds a monopoly on individuals disposed to closed-minded predjudices.
Thank you!!! [clappity clappity}
I’m liberal and Catholic take that hueydoc!
This liberal/conservative bashing has *got* to stop. Can’t you people see this is a religious flamewar picture? Get on it!
You’re right, the point is that Pope Benedict looks like a Sith Lord and possibly eats babies.
More of that Liberal hate.
Most Liberals hate Nazis. I can see why Benny receives such venom.
But liberals are okay with the KKK, like Democratic Senator Byrd?
Would that be the Christian KKK?
It would be the Democratic Party KKK.
Naah, not any more, most of them became the Reagan Demo-publicans, the others just go to NASCAR races.
We *are* okay with redemption. You know, like “Wow, I don’t know what I was thinking with that whole KKK thing, I can haz forgiveness now please?” “Okay, don’t do it again and we’re cool!”
But…but… I thought forgiveness was a Christian thing. How can we forgive and be anti-Christian at the same time?
No Liberal that I have ever met has supported the KKK. Or any other miltant racist group. Or any racist group at all.
On the other hand, the KKK member who comes into my CVS all the time claims to be a conservative.
Meet more people.
Most people are too dismal in the intelligence department for me to want that to happen.
So you sit in your basement on your computer on the internet……
I think you have a problem with priorities, I’ve met a lot of people in the real world that are more intelligent then the ones on here, cept Ema, Jane, EP, Lolathan and….well Seth isn’t smart but I still like him/her.
Back at ya!
Zombie Mouthpiece Bot? Really? And here I thought more of you, TC….
Okay, you to Filler, but come on this site would not be as entertaining with out EP and Seth. You gotta admit that. Plus it DOES give you a chance to flex the intelectual muscles.
Intellectual…
I need to use Firefox more, it has spell check.
I just had the craziest conspiracy theory plot. What if EP and Seth are actually the same person… let’s take a minute and wrap our brains around that.
They both have the same intensity… oh nooooooooooooooo!!!
Yes but….Seth doesn’t have a profile
The plot thickens
Can’t do that one Jane, I already put out the conspiracy that Dubya trolls these forums under the name Evil Pundit.
Liberal and Conservative are both social theories. All theories are open to interpretation. From their pedestal of superiority, false pride, and hate the KKK interpreted conservative ideals in a way that suited their selfish nature. The problems come when we elevate theories to socio-political denominations. Wether it’s right or wrong, identifying yourself with a group is to have the blame for the actions of all others claiming the same associative identity projected on you. The most extreme interpretation of Liberalism results in emperial Communism. How many Liberals are willing to support that? About as many Conservatives would support the KKK. The ideal, of course, is to claim no association at all. Would you vote for a bad policy just because it has the label ‘Liberal’ or ‘Conservative’ attached to it? Don’t cheapen yourselves to be just one part of an idea that can never be 100% right in every situation.
This is a very well written post. I think it supports the position many independents are in when they say they don’t vote for the party but try to pick the candidate they like better. From my cynical point of view I have an overwhelming of mistrust in all politicians, the nature of the game is such that I can’t always believe they are going to do what they say they do. I think many people follow parties because they are reasonably assured that as far afield as their candidate may go, they are more than likely not going to go to far against their own party. It is a security blanket for many voters, so they pick a party that matches up with MOST of their ideals and then trust that their candidate cares more about their career and won’t stray to far from the party. Of course you also have the people that vote party politics because they’re lazy and it’s easy, but the above is my cynical reason for being a democrat. Also, being a democrat hasn’t prevented me from voting for republican senators for my home state that I thought would do a better job than their opposition.
In my effort to make sense out of my jumbled thoughts, I seem to have forgotten the difference between to and too. Fail on me.
When you have something truely intelligent to say, noone cares about your grammar. The people who care about grammar, simply don’t have anything intelligent to say.
Why do you have to be liberal to take a shot at Catholicism? That seems like a forced, agenda driven conclusion.
no, he doesn’t eat babies, he’s catholic, he raises them so when they get to the age of 8 or so he’ll have someone to…….you know what, no good is going to come of me finishing this post, so I’ll let everyone use their imagination on where it was going.
In such a context imagination is a bad thing,and will lead people down many a twisted road.
what’s wrong with twisted? My walking stick is twisted and it serves just fine. Same thing with licorice. It’s twisted and pretty darn tasty.
What’s with the pimp hat??
needs a feather.
Okay, I have to ask – Why is the pope wearing a cowboy hat?
Booo! Hiss!
Funny, I laughed at the irony, cause the pope doesn’t acutally support killing babies.
Good point. It really ought to be Obama killing a “partially born” one.
You do realize that they made partial birth abortions illegal…
Truth and Evil Pundit have a mutual restraining order, wherein they must stay 500′ apart.
I don’t think it’s so much a restraining order as lines of code set to ignore or mock anything that cannot be “verified” through Fox News or Rush Limbaugh’s talking points.
They did, but Obama killed the IL Born-live Infants Protection Bill as an IL Senate committee Chairman in 2003. That bill would only have protected infants born alive during abortion from being left to die. Partial birth abortions are illegal, but infants that would otherwise survive with food and standard medical attention can be neglected and left to die of starvation or preventable medical complication (whichever comes first). If a woman is not intending to have an abortion, they call this murder. The bill was copied off a Federal bill that passed by Congress in 2003, was not even opposed by NARAL.
Also Obama voted “present” as an IL Senator on a bill banning partial birth abortion. With a majority vote of “yes,” a vote of “present” means is counted as a no. And, he voted against a bill in 2000 banning State funding for partial birth abortion. Though both bills made provision for the life of the mother, they did not make allowances for the ‘health’ of the mother.
Even without supporting partial birth abortion, Obama’s views on abortion are still relatively extreme.
There is no medical procedure titled ‘partial birth abortion’. The term describes several different procedures, performed in approximately 1.4% of all abortion cases.
Misinformation fail.
“An abortion in which the person performing the abortion, deliberately and intentionally vaginally delivers a living fetus until, in the case of a head-first presentation, the entire fetal head is outside the body of the mother, or, in the case of breech presentation, any part of the fetal trunk past the navel is outside the body of the mother, for the purpose of performing an overt act that the person knows will kill the partially delivered living fetus; and performs the overt act, other than completion of delivery, that kills the partially delivered living fetus.” -18 U.S. Code 1531- Exact definition of ‘partial birth abortion’ as found in the Partial Birth Abortion Ban Act.
So, you can call it ‘intact dilation and extraction,’ or you can call it ‘partial birth abortion.’ ‘Partial birth abortion’ at least allows for the doctor to perform the intact dilation and extraction procedure on a deceased fetus. Also, approximately 1.4% of abortions are considered ‘late term.’ Only 15% of those are truely by the intact dilation and extraction procedure. That results in about 2500-3000 a year. It’s not about how many or how often. It is about how ethically sound it is (you know…whether it’s right). The post wasn’t about abortion. It was about Obama’s voting record. I got my information from NARAL (pro-choice watch dogs). I say exactly what I mean. Stay on subject, and inform yourself before you call a ‘misinformation fail.’
And now you know why.
No one expects the Spanish baby inquisition!
That would have been a much better caption!
This made me laugh, thanks.
Put him in the bouncy chair!
Implying the pope eats babies.
My Nonno would cry.
I lol’d.
Hey guys, sorry I just had to point out the fact that he look exactly like “Kane” from “Polergeist 2″ in this picture.
If JPII could see that hat, he would slap the taste out of Benedict’s mouth in a VC minute.
Hayes, an outspoken Scientologist, said “There is a place in this world for satire, but there is a time when satire ends and intolerance and bigotry towards religious beliefs of others begins,” in reference to the “Trapped in the Closet” episode which mocked the Church of Scientology and several celebrity followers.
Matt Stone, a co-creator of South Park, told the Associated Press that “This is 100 percent having to do with his faith of Scientology… He has no problem — and he’s cashed plenty of checks — with our show making fun of Christians.”
[b]Stone claimed that “[Hayes] wants a different standard for religions other than his own, and to me, that is where intolerance and bigotry begin.”[/b]
All politics aside I thought this was hilarious, just look at the look on his face, it totally fits the caption! Let’s just calm down a bit here kids.
Actually I was thinking to myself, that baby looks plump enough for me! Hand it over here!! It is a cute baby….
How about ” You can have my toy holster and cap guns, my child, but I’ma keeping the hat!”?
lOLZ!1
How many babies does it take to paint a wall?
Depends on how hard you throw them!
MWHAHAHAHAHAHA!!!!!
I was gonna do a “spanish inquisition” or “pimp hat” joke…but people beat me to the punch…so….I had to go with alternative homur….
must restrain…can’t…hold…back….no..noooooooooo….
What’s the difference between a pile of dead babies and corvette?
I don’t have a corvette in my garage…
MWHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHA!!!
…..
I have to poop.
Poop!
i think my grandma has that hat, dude….
Great and all … but HOW did your post end up not being exactly at the bottom?
WTF!!!!!!!!! Conservatives are some of the most intolerant people I’ve ever met!! Are you saying that Obama hates white straight Christians too??!!!!