Still beating.
Still beating. Still beating. Uh-oh…
(Donald Rumsfeld, George W. Bush and Dick Cheney)
Picture by: dunno source. Caption by: dunno source via Advanced Lol Builder
You May Like:
Show Only: Democrats | Republicans | Media | Military
« Previous A solar-powered teleprompter! | Don’t look now, but… Next »
» 504 comments
-
Recent Comments
oɹɹɐɥɔ on Let’s imagine the look o… oɹɹɐɥɔ on Let’s imagine the look o… oɹɹɐɥɔ on Vladurday: FACT Wino on Let’s imagine the look o… oɹɹɐɥɔ on “No Child Left Behi… Andy who was once di… on Let’s imagine the look o… pittypat on Let’s imagine the look o… pittypat on Let’s imagine the look o… Jane St.Clair is ver… on KINDNESS Jane St.Clair is ver… on KINDNESS 
Cheezburger Network Blog
That was my exact thought when I first saw this picture *I do believe* on CNN.com.
Either that, or “what the hell are those guys feeling for, anyway?”
After checking the entire breast, stand in front of a mirror with your hands pressing firmly down on your hips, look at your breasts for any changes of size, shape, contour, or dimpling, or redness of the nipple. See above photo for a demonstration of these procedures.
You need to have a heart for it to be beating – so Cheyney should not be worried.
No Cheney shouldn’t be worried. He’s a vampire/the prince of darkness/ satan’s spawn and I’m pretty sure none of them have hearts (that beat anyways).
Why do you run and hide from lies, to try it just aint smart,
Why cant I free your doubtful mind and melt your cold cold heart?
Cold cold heart
Hard done by you
Some things look better baby
Just passing through….
A robot heart for my sleep-in girl, she knows CPR
So I can come back to life
Awwww…a little EJ
Sortuva narrative. I’ll leave it there.
Sweet deceit comes calling
And negativity lands….
Have you ever heard Sinead O’Connor’s cover of that song? It’s loverly. It’s on youtube, I’d like it for you but I don’t know how to post a link up in this joint, yo.
I’ve heard it. They’re both hear wrenching.
Linkey.
To link: copy and paste the link into the “website” spot above.
* heart, not “hear,” although that is actually amusing.
Aw thanks, you HairySexyTroll you!
*swoons*
*bridge collapses*
Hey HST…if I have my gravatar link in my website spot, do I have to remove it to post a different link?
Yup!
But you can paste it back in when you’re finished, FWIW.
You, sir, are a gentleman and scholar, and a hairy sexy troll.
Still… nothing compares to nothing compares…
Linkey.
I love her first 2 albums–helped me survive a bad breakup.
She has a really good variety of newer stuff that doesn’t get much play. If you like her, you might want to check out:
- Am I Not Your Girl? (a collection of covers of the songs her parents loved)
- Throw Down Your Arms (reggae songs, sounds like it would be weird but it’s really good!)
Sort of like UB40 doing The Eagles without the backbeat.
Full of funny. I lolled.
Oh yeah? Well I ROFLed!
I lolrofllmfao’d….twice.
I did it infinity…. twice.
*crap*
Now everybody knows I’m chuck norris.
Sex with female version of Chuck Norris: emasculatingly amazing.
But does she still have the beard?
*shudder*
sending cap’t wow facial dipilatory and personal razor just in case…..
The mood is broken though the gifts are a nice and thoughtful touch.
No beard guys, I promise!
Chuck Norris has a beard with another fist under it.
If you are Chuck Norris, even a female one, you would have that beard for the extra fist hidden weapon motif.
Ergo, I cannot choose the Captain Wow in front of me.
This fist Capt. Wow has is hidden under a whole different kind of wiry hair. I’m guessing anyway.
… Which is why I cannot chose the Captain Wow in front you…
*shudder*
That’s…. just bad. Okay, I give up. I’m not chuck norris! As a matter of fact my days are probably numbered for impersonating him. He doesn’t take too kindly to people pretending to be him.
All you need is some simple-minded guy to dive in front of Chuck for you, in defence of a damsel in distress.
Y’know, to buy you time to escape.
Any volunteers?
*man, she’s cute. hope there’s some kind of lumbering psychopath after her, so I can die trying to save her*
Ahem… don’t mind me. Just my instinct for self-preservation fighting a loosing battle with my libido here.
Such a scary variation on the Vaginas Dentata!
This one is quite funny.
A break from the usual I suppose.
Yes I liked it too. I can just see seconds later Cheney keeling over face first.
*facegrass*
lol’d at *facegrass*
It made me think of drugs. Then Cheny on drugs. Which could only end hilariously badly.
Drugs could only improve Dick Cheney. Preferrably enough drugs to stop his incessant breathing.
No need to be harsh. Just enough to stop his incessant talking, and thinking. He can sit there drooling away happily to himself. Seems more fitting, somehow.
With him misusing Force Lighting to win arguments on CNN.
I think I would give up a year’s pay to see that, LOL.
If only I had the knowhow to make video games. Darth Cheney would be an epic hit.
I am thinking ‘O.K., one down – two to go’
I’m thinking, “Oh, so that’s what they mean by tricurious.”
Honestly, although it’s still an “loldumbrepublicans” caption.
It made me laugh out loud.
Yeah, I had to actually emphasize, no acronyms for me funnyman!
*Heroic pose*
Then WTF is FMyVirgin?
AWGTHTGTTA?
GSYJDWURMNKH!
AMRMTYFTS…
TTTHTFAL!
IITYWIMWYBMAD…
Fine. FMLTWIA.
C4N!
You know there was a lol right there to point out, right?
Must have missed it. Do tell.
well that or being shot in the face with a shotgun
Okay yes this is funny, but I am getting tired of people making fun of Cheney every day. He is the only one standing up and telling it to Obama, I’m(if the only one) happy about that.
Funny thing, Cheney still gets airtime. Did any Democrats get a similar amount of airtime on the majors to point out Bush’s failings, or the Democrats’ plans? Nope, not really.
Seth, are you serious? The Democrats were all over networks to point out Bush’s failings.
Case in point: the dude who looks like a snake, James Carville. He’s only one of many many many.
Ew, I hate that guy. Soooo creepy.
It’s because he’s married to a Conservative, right? You Conservo-Hater!!!!
I’ve hated him ever since what he said about (which one?) of the women that brought suit against Clinton in the ’90s:
“It’s amazing what you get when you drag a $100 bill through a trailer park”.
No, it’s because he has a skeleton-face and spits when he talks. Ever notice how people lean awaaaaaay from him when he’s talking? I’m fairly liberal and I don’t like to listen to him, let alone watch him. Ick.
I will give Cheney credit for one thing and one thing only: he restated that he is in favor of gay marriage. I know the only reason he is in favor of this is because of his daughter, but it’s something. It does show he has a heart as he’ll break party lines to support his daughter. I’m sure there are plenty of politicians and regular people alike who wouldn’t do that. Honestly, I’m sure a lot of conservative parents wouldn’t change their views on gay marriage because of their kids, yet Darth Cheney is for it. Good for him.
BTW, this is the ONLY time I’m gonna say something nice about Cheney. Don’t get used to it.
I’ll bet on that…(50 says he doesn’t say another nice thing about Cheney till he dies)
Until who dies, me or Cheney?
If you bet on Cheney dying first you’ve got better odds.
Telling it to Obama? He’s on the air to cover his ass for those war crimes he committed.
You know, I’ve seen Cheney more in these past few months than I saw of him during his own vice presidency. I wonder if he’s sent his gay daughter to Gitmo yet to cure her, since being gay is a choice/illness after all. At least according to my right wing in-laws
What failings, Bush kept us safe for over 7 years. If Obama had been president when the Terrorists(yes the Terrorists) attacked we would have tried to be nice and try and sit down with Bin Laden, have a cup of tea and what not. America would have been attacked a bunch more times and there is no way Obama would have let them find anything out from the Terrorists we caught(cause that would be cruel…cry me a river).
Basically it’s like this,
Obama, Democrats, Liberalism = Destruction of Capitalism, American Deaths, Good will to all Terrorists.
Bush, Republicans, Conservatism = America was safe, the Terrorists were in retreat, Capitalism flourished(until the Democrats took over Congress)
If by safe you mean bankrupt, undereducated, unemployed, and disliked by a growing segment of the world’s population, then good stuff, well done! Love your use of Terrorism with a capital T, it makes it much scarier.
and don’t forget the anthrax that was sent vie us postal service
and getting rid of habeus corpus was a good move too, right along with warrentless wiretaps, which I’m sure were never used to spy on political opposition. Don’t forget about all the great pics from Abu Graib (sp?) that went all around the world. I’m sure that made the terrorisit’s numbers shrink and didn’t aid in their recruiting at all. Of course that was all the soldiers’ own ideas of what to do while bored and not ordered from Rumsfeld and approved of by W. (wink)
“Bush kept us safe for over 7 years”
So, by your estimation an 88% “safety rating” is good…hmmm…interesting…
Well sure, they kept us safe. If you don’t count the worst attack on American soil in history, bankrupting the country for a war of choice, and causing the deaths of 5475 soldiers (so far).
That’s not counting Arab deaths. Of course, you wouldn’t, would you?
Basically it’s like this:
Our people caught terrorists and used methods to question them sanctioned by the FBI and the Army Field Manual, and got a load of good solid actionable intelligence. But none of it linked Saddam to al-Qaeda, so the interrogators who were getting the good intel were replaced with CIA subcontractors who used the illegal shit the communist regimes have been using to extract false confessions for decades. The illegal shit, alas, caused the prisoners to clam up or start spouting whatever false garbage they could come up with to make it stop.
Meanwhile, the regulations that couldn’t be dismantled were neutered by hiring regulators who at best would sit on their hands, and at worst would snort coke and have sex with the industry reps they were meant to regulate. With effectively no controls on the system, the markets overheated, leading to a crash that was absolutely inevitable regardless of who held Congress.
Shorter basically it’s like this: You’re full of it, friend.
WHOAH – that was…utterly bizarre. Do you get dizzy spinning faster than an F6, or do you have good spotters?
You wouldn’t recognize the truth if it bit you in the prodigious ass. Move along, nothing to see here.
woots for Slan
I love the wild speculation.
I also love the partisan blaming.
Everyone knows that standing aside, pointing at the other person screaming “He did it!” is the best way to solve problems…when you’re 5 years old and you broke Mom’s vase.
In the grown up world it doesn’t matter who’s fault it is, the only thing that matters is the solution to the problem.
NO we would have gone after Osama Bin Laden instead of using it as an excuse to go after Saddam—and Bin Laden would not have been on TV this morning. Terrorism was definitely not in retreat- recruitment for Al Qaida (sp fail- sorry) and other terrorist groups were found to increase, starting election day 2000. Military sources and the FBI/CIA have reported that terrorist groups have increased and infiltrated into areas they were not in previously in the middle east in the course of the Bush administration- perhaps this would have occurred anyway- however, one cannot say terrorism was “in retreat” under Bush. At best it maintains a growth trajectory- at worst it developed one.
I’m not saying Bush’s administration was perfect, no president has had a perfect admoinastreantion. I would love for Obama to save the economy, but he’s not cause he is doing everything wrong. Does anybody really want to pay all these new taxes for plans that are running us down a ditch? Don’t think so, instead of growing government and raising taxes, we should lower taxes and stop spending. It was spending that got us into this mess(yes Bush helped with that, but Obama is spending way more then him) spending won’t get us out.
Sorry if I don’t take your word for it that “Obama is doing everything wrong” with regard to the economy. At least Obama is spending on our country, vs pouring nearly nine hundred billion dollars into the occupation of Iraq.
Hehe – you should try asking an economist sometime. And I don’t mean Paul the fraud Krugman.
I had no idea you were more educated than the entire Nobel committee. Where does one get such an education? What kind of a job does one get with that education?
As occupation, I’d list Internet(s). Also, one gets such an education studying under Chuck Norris (I apologize deeply, I couldn’t think of another place.)
I have little to no desire to be a college professor, which is largely what one can do with an economics degree. Unless one decides instead to write political opinion pieces like Krugman and gets a job in the lamestream media as a darling of the left. I could never pander to the left, so that ain’t me.
:O You don’t want to study under Chuck Norris?!
by the way, it’s still tyler
Not surprising you couldn’t name any real economists, though (Chuck Norris? LOL.) Thank you for making my point for me.
I was not trying to name an economist. I was trying to think of a place that would make you more intelligent than all of the Nobel committee. I neither agreed or disagreed with Mark, merely tried to lighten the conversation.
(sigh) it’s really, really sad when someone completely misses a chuck norris joke. kind of embarrasing really. she’s making chuck norris’ beard weep!
Cure for cancer now?
No way.
If beardgoo were a cancer cure, I’d be stuck forever in a lab producing it.
Those are Chuck Norris’ tears. Humans have to concept of what will happen if his beard’s tears are loosed on the world.
*no* Srsly, what is wrong with me today.
You’ve been bitten up to hell and back. I was a bit rough, apologies.
Sure, anyone who disagrees with you is automatically unqualified. Any information that contradicts your tiny worldview is automatically a product of a worldwide conspiracy.
Seen it.
Bored with it.
Look up “intellectual integrity” and get back to us.
At my expense, thank you for the mood lightener.
Sorry about the accidental name change, by the way. Wasn’t trying to troll (deliberately, at least. O.O) but i accidentally logged into gravatar, which makes the name i type in the box invalid and automatically goes to the nickname >.<
(Don’t bother using humor when talking to Annie; her level of humor is “Then the Democrat fell on a rusty knife and died a horribly painful death over a period of weeks”)
I know I’m laughing…..did he die of ptomaine poisoning, or simply bled out?
He bled out. He’s a bleeding heart liberal. GET IT??????? Oh that’s a good one! *head explodes*
I lol’d.
Care to back that up with a citation please?
OMG it’s a joke! WHO ARE YOU AND WHY ARE YOU HACKING ANNIE’S ACCOUNT!!!!
Most people don’t find jokes about rusty knives killing people to be too funny, Anniee included. Nor do most people like to be accused of finding them funny, even as a “joke.” So we are retracting that statement then? It was “just a joke” and was not indeed accurate, correct?
No, I truly believe that’s your level of humor.
Then again I ask you could you please bring up a citation to back this statement? Because it’s highly inflammatory.
Just don’t care, Annie. I’ve never received anything but abuse from you when I treated you with respect. Never got a response from you that even indicated you understood a word I said in the past. I’ve never heard you say to anybody, “well, we disagree, but we’re all Americans and we need to stick together”.
Choke on it.
So, you made the accusation without a shred of proof, a scintilla of evidence, and you expect it to stick even though I’ve never come close to making or laughing at a “joke” of that sort? I guess it’s par for the course. I do hope you at least read the economics article I linked you to – kinda blows that Krugman stuff hollow like blowing out an egg, eh?
There you go, Seth – if I turn the other cheek, I’m told to “choke on it” and accused of the most vile kinds of sentiments that I’ve never expressed. Go figure, huh?
Telling someone out of the blue to kiss your ass is turning the other cheek? DAMMIT. I’ve been doing it wrong this whole time……….
Don’t worry, I can predict with 99% accuracy exactly what froo will do to provide the ‘proof’ you didn’t. And I don’t believe it’s the same thing at all; only that she’ll do it to say “Harumph! Anniee you suck!” In 3…2…1…
(Nesting fail, froo. This was turning the other cheek; that was a goof. You should have put this there. However, you’re missing a golden one…)
Tell you what, Anniee, in the spirit of Glasnost, I’ll do as you’ve asked and kiss your ass, but you’re going to have to point out which zip code you want me to start in. It’s a big area, and I’m a little lost as to where to begin. Perhaps if you removed your head you might could offer some help as to where on your spacious ass you’d like me to kiss?
OH! NO, YOU DI’NT!
Nesting fail, froo. Different conversation altogether. Bigotry noted.
And since you wasted your opportunity – a huge Bzzzt! Wrong answer. You could have bested me and failed miserably; too bad. I need more worthy opponents. Mark can’t back up his accusations; froo is forced to bring up entirely different conversations and resort to bigotry (though I’ve never mentioned what I do or don’t weigh – hint, one can be a teetotaller and be against the drug war, for example) – and that’s just all you guys have to bring. I’ve been wasting my efforts insulting you. You do just fine looking bad without my help.
Mark, did you think her implication that I might be fat would hurt? I know and love too many fat people for that ploy to work. Better try another tack, hon. The rusty knife ploy fell flat too – what will it be next?
I’ve already said, Annie, I’m done trying to invite you into the community of humans we are trying to develop here. You can only get along with someone who agrees with you 99% of the time. Dhoti is the ONLY person you’ve ever had anything nice to say to. (no, wait, there was a driveby wingnut a few lols back that you agreed with too, my bad.)
I’m glad you realize insulting us is a waste of time. Personally, I consider the source, and I can only laugh.
True to form, Markie. Make an unfounded assertion, then when asked for a citation, turn around and say “Neiner, you don’t DESERVE one!” By the way, you’re wrong – my first few posts to Froo were very highly complimentary – she turned around and snapped like a rabid dog because I’d crossed the likes of Fisty and other hard leftist jackas*es.
So we’ve established that you lied about me – can you PERHAPS stop doing that much, Mr. More Human Than I?
Seth – this is why I don’t turn the other cheek in an online discussion forum – it’s not even applicable. Though I do admit it only served to make Mark look far worse than usual; the fact is it’s very boring to me and it should be to you too. How about letting me do what I like and conversing with you and whoever is willing to converse on the occasions that happens, eh?
In Anniee’s defense, she has been nice to me in the past. This has been recently, and in a series of paragraphs on a single LOL. I thought we had reached a consensus that would allow she and I to get along, as we both agreed that the few Conservatives here shouldn’t fight. We were in agreement on that LOL about several subjects, and I had hoped that our days of fighting were over.
-
Then on the next LOL that she commented on she was back to her old ways, and nullified the entire conversation the night before. I’m not sure if she was drunk when she was nice, or if she’s drunk the other times, or if she’s drunk at all. I’d rather think that she drunk posts more often than not, because someone with her potential and formidable strengths in debate should not be wasted on petty insults and trying to win all the time. If she’s drunk when she’s being mean then she has an excuse. Otherwise, she’s just an ass, and I don’t want to think that she is, considering that there have been times that she’s been nice to people who don’t always agree with her.
-
There is a time to fight, and a time to listen to the other side respectfully, regardless of how they treat you. I’m not sure she’s figured that out yet.
For Droid, who was being warned not to speak with me lest he be tainted by the taint of taintness (because apparently I make jokes about people being killed by rusty knives – not) here’s an example of something I DO actually find funny. Of course, I always commend the Lols I think are funny, none of which are about rusty knives, but hey – never let facts get in the way, right markie? (Link – don’t worry, everyone will like it.)
No dice, froo – I was nice when I met you, but I genuinely don’t like you, and you know why. Mostly your bigotry. We did not agree on that thing – you merely asked it and I did not reply – silence does not imply consent. The vast majority of my posts are from work – voila! Not drunk, not that that is ANY of your concern.
Now shoo! Some of us grownups are trying to talk.
Where were you nice to me today, Anniee? When you told me to kiss your ass out of the blue when I hadn’t said anything to you? Or was that another time?
As to the kiss my back cheek comment; the full context is available right on THIS thread ffs – how do you think you can lie about it here and now? It WAS a joke with a very specific meaning, and it was not in reply to some nice, friendly comment you made, but in reply to your mocking my tongue-in-cheek post about Cheney by calling him Rasputin, as though there is anything comparable. Froo, you are the weaseliest little sh*t I’ve EVER met anywhere. Seriously; I’ve never met a more mealy-mouthed outright weasel such as you behave as.
It truly pains my soul that you don’t like me. In fact, I think I will go home and write in my diary about it tonight. I might even write a letter to my congressman and ask him how to be less mealy mouthed and less weasely so that you will like me.
-
Anniee, the reason you don’t like me is because I don’t fit your ideal of a Christian Conservative Woman. Sorry. We’re all different, and that’s ok.
“I’ve never heard you say to anybody, “well, we disagree, but we’re all Americans and we need to stick together”.
Just remembered this one. LOL
That’s because I don’t feel that way. Not after the last 8 years – unless you can point me to how accommodating the left was towards that point of view, even in light of the fact that we were at freaking WAR with people who wanted to kill us all. No, no, Mark – 9/11 radicalized me and 8 years of bashing (without a SINGLE peep of “We have to stick together) solidified it. Now you choke on it, friend. Choke on every word the left has put out for the last decade – in fact, the last 30 or 40 years I’ve been alive, considering it’s never really begun or ended. Tsk tsk – how soon you forget. Do you have like brain damage or something? Temporal lobe affected?
And FTR, I didn’t call Cheney Rasputin. I rather like Cheney. You might want to go back and see the actual source of that post.
Froo, you don’t fit my idea of a human being, at least if message boards are any indicator (which really they aren’t.) You’re the nastiest kind of bigot and instigator and have been from my first days here. The way you follow behind the vilest kind of abusers sniffing turds and lapping them up only makes it that much worse.
I almost NEVER bring up Christianity – unless you’re talking about me calling you a Froodenrat, which I happen to believe is absolutely true. That has nothing to do with Christianity either. Whatever you are or play in real life, I don’t want to know you here.
You’ve done your work, though, distracting from the lie Mark told about me, which was your real goal.
How about backing up what he said or shutting the F up yourself, huh? If you share his sentiment, PROVE IT.
What amazes me is that you think that my feelings hinge on your view of me. You call me terrible names, accuse me of things that simply aren’t true, make LOL pictures that are so disgusting that they are taken down by the moderators, and then accuse me of being a bigot.
-
Ok, I’m a bigot, and you don’t like me. Now why are you still bothering to respond instead of moving on to greener pastures over at your feminist site?
Because I’m an anti-feminist and don’t run or post at feminist sites? So why are you continuing to cover for Mark’s lie, exactly? Why the big distraction to cover that he has no citation whatever for his lie about me? What IS that about? One of those cases where a dear friend has had his widdwe feewings hurt and you have to stick up for him or what?
Mark is a big boy and can fight his own battles. He’s already said that his statement comes from his overall view of you. If you’re so set on him citing something, then ask him, not me.
Nope, froo. You jumped into the middle of it to cover for him with something from an ENTIRELY unrelated nest at the bottom of the page, where it belonged. What is your angle in protecting him here? He lied. That’s the long and short of it. He can not back it up. And you threw away the opportunity to do so (I’m surprised, since it would have been so easy.) I have asked him, how about you get YOUR big butt out of the way so I can keep asking him, eh?
Now who’s calling who fat? I guess that makes you the bigot, especially since you’re throwing racially and anti-Semitic epithets at me…….
Hey, since fat is apparently some kind of insult to you, I figured you wouldn’t like it. Despite the fact that at least half your “dear friends” here are fat themselves, you seem to see it as a negative thing, though I can’t imagine why. Gotcha, eh?
Nice broad brush there as you manage to insult half (in your words) of the people here. You’re making assumptions that you can’t possibly know, and are most likely wrong about. As far as the Antisemitism of your words, that’s cut and dried; want to prove who the bigot is now?
Again, very telling, bigot, that you see “fat” as an insult, when all it is is a body type, or a description of adipose tissue. Thanks for playing and rising to the bait!
Oh, antisemitism because I called you Judenrat? If the jackboot fits, honey, wear it. You gave me a thorough description of your judenrat behavior against fellow (insert whatever you claim to be here) and exactly WHY you do it. Sorry, no go. No anti-Semitism to see here. But it is fascinating how you view fat as some type of horrible thing…you an anorexic perhaps? Some kind of weird aversion to adipose tissue, rooted in past abuse, or what?
And yet, casually throwing about names like “froodenrat”, “bigot”, and “not a human being” are ok. Gotcha, I’ll go ahead and write that down in my “How To Be A Good Bigot” Handbook.
-
Now, shall we move on to when you’re actually going to stop rising to my level and responding, when you don’t, in fact, consider us to be contemporaries?
Yes, I was just told I wasn’t a human being above, by your dear friend. PAY ATTENTION, froo.
And yes, you are a bigot. You’re a bigot against gays (at least people’s gay children), fat people, and any number of others as demonstrated over the past couple months. That isn’t a “name thrown around” – that’s just an accurate descriptor of what you are. You’ve shown your fat-hatred right here in this conversation.
Actually, it’s kind of cute that you just couldn’t bear to leave Mark hanging here with egg on his face. Cute like purple AIDS sores.
It’s funny that you tell me to pay attention when you clearly didn’t notice who started the “blank/blank 2012″ thread. Perhaps you should also go back and read exactly what Mark said about the “community of humans”, as he’s not calling you non-human, but rather an outsider to a group.
I’d like cites on all of those accusations, since you’re the one making the claim. I’ll hold my breath until you find them.
I am remembering that little thread about Liberal hunting permits and how liberals need to take a joke, even one painfully at their own expense.
Hypocrite much?
It was an opinion- that PM has. The first amendment allows us opinions. It was not a nice opinion of you- he does not think you are nice- do I need to cite that PM thinks you are not nice- or will the above comments work? PM can you please please please publish a 3-5 page paper in the Journal of Behavioral Neurosciences proving that you do not think this person is nice so I can cite it? thanks!
… I’m kind of amazed that after I stopped posting last night, me joking around and accidentally insulting Anniee caused this. I’m proud in a sick way and disgusted with myself at the same time O.o.
And Anniee, taking being called “fat” as an insult doesn’t prove that you hate fat people. It proves that you don’t want and/or don’t find that body type desirable, that’s all.
Umm… The “Liberal hunting permit” that you thought was so hilarious, maybe?
First, link to a real economist. Second, Arafat and Algore both won Nobels – not exactly a commendation there. Third, can you name the very narrow area in which Krugman DID win that prize, and do you know how little it means in the scheme of economics as a whole? Didn’t think so. His columns are not even economics columns but political screeds. Genuine economists facepalm at your lack of knowledge and how easily hoodwinked the adoring public really is.
And do notice that in all the above posturing, Mark still can’t argue with a real economist. LOL
Ohhhhh the sting – first an uncitable lie, then froo having to defend him, then the inability to argue a subject he seems to think he knows something about. God, that’s got to smart.
Bush screwed up the economy, but Obama will fix it. Even with the bailout (Thanks, Bush!) Obama hasn’t spent nearly as much as Bush, who took the Clinton surplus and booming economy and ran them into the ground.
Over the last hundred years, if y had invested money in stocks only during Democratic presidents’ terms, you would have averaged 8.9% return on your investment. If you had only invested only during Republican presidents’ terms, you would have averaged 0.4%.
{http:// http://www.tradersnarrative.com/does-wall-street-prefer-a-democrat-or-republican-president-2047.html}
The Republicans keep on ruining the economy, while the Democrats keep on fixing it. You’re welcome.
Every time a Republican gets voted in recently, he does good, but the media says he does bad. All the people run to the Democrats, they screw up, the people realize, hay we made a bad choice, then they run back to the Republicans to fix it.
You’ve got it backwards. The media loves Republicans, look how much press Cheney and company are getting. We Democrats got almost no coverage during Bush’s terms.
Republicans screw up the economy, and Democrats fix it. Look at the link I provided. Look how badly the economy has always done under Republicans. But never fear, the Democrats will always be there to clean up after you guys break things.
You need to provide more proof for your assertions. Without proof, all you have are uninformed opinions. For instance, I proved that Republicans screw up the economy, and Democrats fix it with that link up above. You’ve just stated your opinion.
But after the Democrats are voted out of office there is always a Republican and visa versa. Maybe they are cleaning up after the mess the Democrats made, how can you tell? And, if the Democrats do so well, why do Republicans ever get voted back in?
The same way the Democrats get in. They find an angle and work it like a drunken Chinese hooker.
dwn strikes again.
.
and sorry seth, but ANY assertions that the economy is either helped or hurt by a specific political party is completely groundless. if you look at the data, when there is a dem in the white house there is usually a repub congress and vice versa. the checks and balances are at work and no one party can control everything… the only thing i will agree to on this economic issue is that ALL politicians screw it up.
Read the linked article above. The trend is crystal clear.
There is a trend, but is it taking into account the “four year rule of thumb” when dealing with the economy? (I haven’t followed your link yet….no time…..but I have seen graphs in the past). For roughly 2-4 years the economy can be blamed on the last guy there, after that, it’s squarely in the lap of the sitting guy. In other words, rule of thumb-wise, Reagan fixed Carter, Bush 41 skated on coattails, Clinton rode Bush and created his own good vibes, Bush skated on Clinton and then started the slide. You can’t look at what’s going on RIGHT NOW or yesterday to see what caused it, or what party caused it. A lot depends on the Congressional make-up, the international market at the time, and whether or not the guy before you screwed the pooch royally. Now, in about a year and a half, Obama has no more excuses if the economy hasn’t at least stopped the slide back.
-
Remember, this is all from a non-economist who knows only the rule of thumb, but that the rule of thumb has held basically true over her lifetime
sorry seth, but the article uses statistics and draws conclusions from those statistics with blinders on… there are A LOT more trends than just who the president is… here’s a great example of what they’ve done though…
did you know that when ice cream sales increase so do the number of drownings?
……………………………………
That was possibly the best way to end a post. Ever.
They show causation by showing the conditions are both necessary and sufficient. That’s how you prove a correlation is a causation, FYI.
i actually read a statistic once that showed, unequivocally, anyone who has ever eaten at mcdonalds has eventually died. it’s true.
That’s because it’s summer. Duh.
“when there is a dem in the white house there is usually a repub congress and vice versa”
Except from 2001 to 2006, of course.
Okay thats a weird way to put it, but thats a good explantation. so really we don’t no who does better, because we keep going back and forth(it would help if the Republicans would stop trying to act like the Democrats though).
WIN. h/o a few death, i need to stitch my ass back on.
Read the article behind the link above. It lays out the proof in clear and unambiguous terms.
Hard to come up with a rebuttal to facts, and only one attack on American soil(witch could have been stopped by Clinton).
Or by his witches. Either or.
or Bush when he got the documentation…
Bin Laden Determined To Strike In U.S. – Presidential daily briefing, August 6, 2001. Bush’s response? “OK, you’ve covered your ass.”
WHO could have stopped what, now?
Can we all be fair to Clinton for just a second? Clinton could NEVER have gone after Bin Laden, because no one would have supported dong so! Not the US, not the Congress, not the Senate, not the UN, or NATO- no one. Because he was not seem as that big of a deal- an problem, yes- but nothing on a scale to justify basically invading Afghanistan and Pakistan to go after him (and they would NEVER have given permission). The fact is that like the recent planned attack on Sears Tower we had enough info to thwart 9/11. However, we did not, until AFTER 9/11 to go directly after Bin Laden- with or without the support of the country(s) he was hiding in. NO ONE would have said- sure, go ahead and assassinate a world (stretching the term- but you get my point) leader- in fact we have laws against the CIA doing that. Without the massive horror of 9/11 no one thought Bin Laden was worth going after directly.
You said massive. *snerk*
i can’t believe you caught that, but missed dong! want to borrow my glasses?
When you get ready to post some facts, let me know, I’m super excited!
Well if we just said, all right Iraq your on your own, so long. Al Qaeda would have come back and the war on terror would have been a heck of a lot harder.
Al Qaeda had no connection to Iraq before we invaded. Iraq had no connection to 9/11. All invading Iraq did was piss everyone off, and make even more Muslims hate us. Bush destroyed our reputation, our morals, and our security.
Besides, Iraq was already sewn up, what was the point of invading? Saddam couldn’t really move left or right without the coalition being on his ass. I’m with you Seth, all it did was piss people off.
Oh, and what do you think would have happened if we didn’t invade? Answer, lots of more American deaths. Course you won’t get that info from Obama he only releases the information that hurts us.
So, you admit to not having any information, you are just guessing that invading a country that had no way of harming us somehow made us safer. Care to explain how that works?
Oh bullsh*t! Iraq had as much to do with 9/11 as you did. What American deaths are you referring to that Saddam had a hand in? Tell me, please, because by MY estimation, American deaths in that country didn’t occur until AFTER we invaded, not before.
the whole problem with iraq is that we should never have left saddam in power in 92… the decade that he had to oppress his people left us with practically no allies in iraq…
Uh… what? Seriously?
Didn’t we have the whole conversation about imperialism just a minute ago, on another thread? How it doesn’t tend to end well for anyone?
we should have bolstered the support for the indigenous groups who wanted saddam removed. instead we talked them up and left them to be slaughtered. i’m not a fan of imperialism, but i do believe that there are certain aspects of it that if implemented correctly would have led to a better future than we are headed towards now… if the iraqis had revolted and thrown out saddam and then set up elections and trade negotiations with the west then there would not have been a place for al queda in iraq to pop up and… you get the gist.
Oh, fair comment. I read in right-wing talking points where there was a legitmate opinion, sorry.
Helping out oppressed people who ask is OK in my book. Though the line between legitimate aid and regime change is a mighty fine one that must be walked carefully. When it’s done right, though, the kind of homegrown evolution you’re talking about can happen.
Fair call UBR.
UBR, I agree 100%.
I’m with ubr on this one. We went into Iraq to stop a madman, but didn’t finish the job. We could’ve easily avoided this whole mess back in ‘92.
You can thank Colin Powell who convinced Bush Sr. not to roll on through to Bagdhad. His rational was that it would have hurt our standing in the Middle East.
Wait- I think that was the right decision- that would be blatant imperialism, and would have resulted in what we have now—-I thought UBR and others (you) were saying we should have done more to support the Ira’s in overthrowing Saddam….that makes sense- and we should have…but then again we inevitably support the wrong person(s)…after all isn’t that what we DID with Saddam originally?
Is that info from the super secret Alternate Future department? I believe it’s housed in the Pentagon.
You actually think that horrific war helped us? You think we are any safer because Saddam is out? Saddam wasn’t a threat to us. It gave the Middle East a bigger reason to hate us, and likely inspired many would-be terrorists on the fence to take up against us (I don’t have numbers handy to support that, but I think it’s true).
Twice as many American’s have died in the Iraq war than were killed in the 9/11 terrorist attack.
Death toll for the war is over 5,000 (Americans)
Death toll for 9/11 was 2,752
Invading Iraq had nothing to do with keeping us safe. Iraq did not attack us, terrorists did. If anything kept us safe, it was increased security, not occupying a nation that had nothing to do with the attack.
Yes, and the CAFE standards on new cars passed in 1975 have killed more people due to lighter cars on the road than the war in Iraq. So there
I don’t see how it’s even possible to make that claim. In 1975, cars didn’t have crumple zones, advanced composite materials, or airbags. Cars are MUCH safer these days, so are you comparing real cars, or imaginary cars, to those of 1975?
Hang on, let me get the article……..
Ok, this is on CNBC, but it’s a blog, so do with it what you will. I have another cite, but I’m searching for it
Here is a cite on the effect of air pollution on illness and death rates due to lung disease–rates were controlled to eliminate the effect of smoking. Same study also points out that the death rate from automobile accidents has increased significantly since the 1970’s due to the increased number of miles driven per person per year since then. –a physics research society, not a political think group, by the way.
I’m not debating the necessity of emission standards. I’m debating the safety of a tin can with a motor. The only way to get better gas mileage at this point is to make the cars even lighter, making them even more dangerous. I’ll not have it, I say! Not. Have. It.
The lower mass wouldn’t be a problem if everyone drove lightweight vehicles. Or we put speed limiters on all of the heavier vehicles, like they do to equalize things on Nascar races… (I used to room with racing geeks)
Would I want a speed limiter on my car? No. But then again, I drive a hatchback, and I don’t live on a ranch! Given the lack of working ranches in the Northeast, I have a ‘thing’ about the SUVs that bully their way around on our roads. But I don’t feel that way about farmers. Anyone who owns a Hummer should have mud on their vehicle at regular intervals!
That’s not true, my Prius has a 5 star safety rating, side curtain airbags and gets about 50 mpg and weighs 2900 lbs.
Also if so many Americans didn’t drive around in land yachts you wouldn’t have to worry so much about being hit by one.
My land yacht is a necessity, and one I can’t get away from. Personally, I think it’s a subtle form of population control.
Folks with farms have a need for land yachts. I know that from my father’s tales of his farm hand days.
Folks without farms, but with multiple rugrats can drive minivans–which could be made to get better mpg!
But most people don’t really need a land yacht. Also, my car can fit five people comfortably (really!). I have put a 7 foot christmas tree inside the vehicle and closed the hatch back (and the tree wasn’t bundled!). Also an 8 foot folding party table. It’s so roomy, I’m considering using it to smuggle Mexicans over the border. Or, drugs.
My hatchback can fit two tall adults, their luggage, plus 3 cats (each in its own carrier). And that doesn’t count if I put the rack on top. So no, most people don’t need a land yacht.
Farmers on the other hand often haul pigs, tools, etc. over open land and/or muddy dirt roads. So…
A minivan won’t pull either a trailer or a boat with ease. Not enough horses under the hood. I’m sorry, I’ll never feel that it’s necessary to make everyone drive tin cans just because. Some people have large families that won’t fit into a 5 passenger car *raises hand* Some people have outdoor needs that require more than what is contained in a minivan *raises hand* And some people don’t want to tangle with a semi truck in said tin can
Semi trucks we will have with us always, and as we don’t have the money, time, or manpower necessary to build separate roads for them to drive on, people need to be safe on the road.
-
Blonde, how will that 5-star rating hold up against a semi?
There’s not a commercial vehicle on the planet that will hold up against a semi. You’re talking about 80,000 lbs. fully loaded.
Get real Froo. That kind of weight would put a serious hurt on an M1-Abrams battle tank, a semi is going to kill everyone in your precious “land yacht” in a highway speed collision.
I understand the horsepower and off-road arguments, as well as cargo/passenger space. Safety is not a valid argument for driving a large vehicle.
Yeah, I’ll take this over a tin can anyday. Love my gas hog.
I put a link in my name.
Exactly The Steve. Crash test ratings aren’t based on getting hit by a semi.
Also, as an aside, many larger vehicles have a higher risk of rolling over in an accident than a compact vehicle.
Higher rollover rating, but you are still more likely to survive the crash. Rolling over in a Volkswagen Beetle, for instance, isn’t pretty. Especially since the damn thing spins like a top.
-
And I was going for the shock of exaggeration with the semi truck. I’m sorry that wasn’t clear.
-
My initial point is that some people need bigger vehicles for daily life, whether they live on a farm, or simply have a big family, or for whatever reason. I don’t like the fact that there is a danger (however small) of my choices to drive a big vehicle with low gas mileage being taken away from me. I also don’t like the fact that because they are going to grandfather in bigger cars, trucks, and SUVs already on the road as far as stricter CAFE standards are concerned, those people who do have to buy a smaller car due to that being the only thing available aren’t as safe as someone who is able to drive a bigger car, truck, or SUV. The numbers as far as fuel economy and overall effect on climate change are so small and tenuous as to be silly to base the life of an entire industry on.
I agree that some people need bigger vehicles than others, and I don’t know of any risk of big vehicles being “taken away” from anyone. The American people were marketed into believing that they needed larger vehicles to keep their families safe to begin with; just like we are marketed into most of the things we don’t really need until we are convinced otherwise, like a new car every five years, or a larger house, or name brand tennis shoes. And fear is one of the best excellent marketing tool – remember when tire commercials started featuring little babies sitting in the tires? And yet, most of our parents didn’t drive SUVs and we all got along just fine.
With regard to fuel economy and the overall effect on climate change, I’m not sure what data you’ve read that indicates that American vehicle emissions aren’t a major part of the problem, but it’s definitely different data than I have seen. Another kind of effective fear-mongering is when industries claim that we’ll suffer some kind of economic collapse if we start attending to environmental issues. It’s a fallacy that has been disproven time and time again, particularly in countries which pay for the healthcare of their citizens. Oh, and to go back to my initial point, conservatives freaking out that there stuff is going to get “taken away” is all part of the same fear-mongering cycle: “don’t allow progress or they’ll take away your guns! They’ll take away your cars! They’ll take away the sanctity of your marriage!” Please.
It’s not that American emissions aren’t a problem, it’s that compared to the entire problem, they are something like 1% of the total. If you factor in everything that contributes that we have control over. I’ll have to see if I can find the article I read. The numbers we’re being fed are just numbers, and they aren’t really given in context. The problem is, there isn’t a real context.
-
Climate change is a serious issue, but it’s the baby on the tire at this point
According to worldviewofclimatechange.org, vehicle exhaust accounts for 30% of US carbon emissions.
That’s good enough. I mean, I’d like to see the methodology of the studies, but he cites more than one. I understand why its true, with more mass, a car slows down less quickly, and thus a person has more time to decelerate, creating less force on internal organs and such.
But basically, those are still imaginary numbers because they don’t account for the lives saved by other technologies. The studies are saying “All other things being equal, X more people will die per pound less vehicle weight.” Which is true, but all other things are not equal.
I had the reports he cited all ready to go, and I have no idea what troll got into my bookmark file and ate them. I’ll keep looking. I actually went and found the National Highway Safety Administration report and it tracked, but where the link is……I dunno.
-
I’m a bad, bad researcher *goes and punishes self*
Nah. The only bad researchers are those who give up, and those who damage the original sources.
*offers cookie to froofrou*
Chocolate chip?
Punish? *gets floggers and scowl ready*
Wait, nevermind. *wanders off*
Maybe, but they have also saved a lot of lives, given that air pollution causes heart and lung diseases to progress much more rapidly. In fact, I wish we would put into law that any car, truck or bus putting out black soot would get a serious fine, since particulate air pollution also contributes to such deaths.
I’m old enough to remember when there was always a layer of brown smog over Los Angeles , and when on a crystal blue day in NYC, you could look up and see the brown crud over your head! (mid-1970’s, when smog alerts were as common as rain predictions). And I have absolutely NO desire to go back to the stink that you would smell driving through certain parts of the country back in those days!! UGH!!
Ooops–nesting. My post was related to CAFE standards.
Don’t be such pessimist. That’s not all we did! Nearly 200,000 people have also died!
Okay then tell me, what would have happened if we didn’t invade?
Nothing.. we would have kept flying the north and south no-fly zones. Since you seem to have all the answers, how was Saddam involved?
We would have been able to give Afghanistan the attention it deserves and maybe had a little left over energy to fight the Taliban in Pakistan?
Wow, there is like no Conservatives around here to back me up… If we didn’t invade, Al Qaeda would have grown much stronger and who knows what they could have done. You want Bin Laden to have possibly gotten Nukes?(not like North Korea is helping matters…)
*facepalm* Let me rehash what we’ve covered so far.
1. Bin Laden is not now, nor has he ever been (since 9/11) in Iraq.
2. There is no link between Al Qaeda and Iraq prior to our invasion. The only reason they are there now is because WE are.
Oh and I almost forgot:
3. Eddie is a conservative and he’s disagreeing with you.
The only proven connection between Saddam Hussein and terrorism is this–SH would give money to the families of Palestinian suicide bombers. So he WAS supporting terrorism in Israel. He had no connection to Osama Bin Laden, whatsoever. Al Qaeda in Iraq was formed after the ‘Shock and Awe” invasion was over.
To be perfectly correct, we don’t have any information to suggest that Bin Laden was or has been in Iraq since 9/11. Because we don’t actually, you know, know where he is, it’s impossible to completely eliminate an entire country. I’m fairly sure he’s not in my office, but I can’t eliminate the possibility that he’s in the US (unlikely as it may be).
he’s not over here. i would’ve shot him for the bounty.
Ok, we’ve eliminated two locations.
He was digging through my garbage, but my damn liberal self didn’t have a gun to shoot him with. He knocked my can over and ran really fast into the woods behind my house before I could catch him. So check the woods behind my house.
(It’s entirely possibly I’m mixing him up with a raccoon, though.)
Ahh, Bin Laden looks just like a raccoon(on something, but a raccoon), so it might have been him.
Waitaminute….I had a raccoon in MY yard before. He’s here, too!
But I saw a raccoon dead on the side of the road…
Which lead to follow??…..
That I need to hunt up that corpse…
…and collect your bounty!
Necrophilia FTW!
And share bounty with friends…
@HST: Not in your wildest dreams, you pervert.
*cackles*
CCCCombo-breaker!
*slinks away to contemplate next evil deed*
Here’s a hint: He went right for the empty soda cans. OBL drinks Pepsi, yo!!
Fair enough Diss, fair enough. I can tell you right now he’s not in my bedroom, but I haven’t outruled the basement, it’s kinda creepy down there.
“To be perfectly correct, we don’t have any information to suggest that Bin Laden was or has been in Iraq since 9/11. ”
Similarly, we don’t have any way of knowing whether or not he was in China, either, why don’t we invade there next? I understand they have a large number of Muslims there!!
So are the moderates, dude.
LMAO!!! Dude, I’m very much a moderate/conservative and even I can see that what you said is untrue. There are some conservatives around here that ‘may’ support you, but I seriously doubt it since your whole line of reasoning is invalid.
I just believe in choosing and/or timing your battles. We were already knee-deep in Afghanistan; there was either no or minimal Al Qaeda presence in Iraq at that point; and as Eddie pointed out we had Saddam pretty much penned in. Diluting an already somewhat bare-bones military to the point where it’s stretched and stressed to the max as far as combat capability, when there’s no exigent circumstances, is not a good move from a strategic standpoint.
I’m not saying that there would not be a time to invade Iraq; I’m saying that the time we did it, wasn’t the right time. The end result has been deleterious to our ultimate objectives in the region. (My opinion).
I work with a bunch of mid level officers across the services about every 3 mo or so and they would agree with you as well…no love lost in the military for old Rummy….if you are going to invade a country and start a war then make sure your guys have body armor and you are willing to get enough boots on the ground to get the job done. Even a lefty like me can agree with that.
There are conservatives here. Dhoti and Anniee451 (or McPhee, she can’t keep it straight, lol) will back you up. So will eddiepscetti and froofrou, as long as you aren’t too ignorant and inflammatory. (they’re our pet conservatives, according to Dhoti and Anniee.) There are also plenty of moderates you can sway with a good argument.
Just don’t think you can get by repeating stuff you heard on Fox News, because we will tear that apart. Think for yourself, find good evidence, and you’ll do fine here, whatever your views.
Thanks for the tip, better to know your jumping into a shark tank than to just jump in…
Sharks? No, more like ill tempered sea bass here.
Fine then let me rephrase, “better to know your jumping into an ill tempered sea bass tank than to just jump in…”
Come on in, the water’s fine!
Well that makes me feel welcome………
In bed… With a penis… Blessed by Dick Cheney…
……. dick cheney had his ability to bless taken away, death. he can voodoo curse things, though.
I wouldn’t want anything to do with a penis blessed OR cursed by Dick Cheney. Call me picky, but…
I think preventing Bin Ladin from getting nukes is an excellent goal, which would best be attained by, oh, maybe, actually FINDING him.
Far more likely to get them from Pakistan than anywhere else if you ask me, anyway.
Scary thing, he is not the only one looking for nukes, finding and dealing with Bin Ladin would not completely solve the radical islamic terror problem although it would be nice, I suspect he is dead. If we did find him we would have to put him up at tax payer expense and he would get good lawyers and hollywood would race to learn his story and he would write a novel and get on Larry King. If he’s not dead and we find him, I would hope he would meet with a fatal accident.
actually, i’m decently sure that while the hollywood stuff might be true he would probably be tried over there, and more than likely would be put to death. So, no real worries about your taxes or books coming out, and hollywood probably does know better than to make a movie with bin laden as the protagonist.
You’d be surprised….
Wait a generation or so.
actually, it would make an incredible story. I am partial to stories where the “bad guy” is the protagonist and focus. it’s delightful seeing their defenses fall from the inside.
hollywood will do anything if they think it’ll make a buck… check out the twilight series…
Score one for ubr.
Sadly you are correct ubr.
i still think that we shouldn’t have let the following coutries have nukes:
israel
pakistan
india
iran
north korea
Okay, giving half those countrys nukes would be like giving a baby a machine gun.
And all of them have nukes, with the exception of Iran. Feel better now?
Yes, actually I do. Not really sure why.
No argument here.
thats correct(I read the thing wrong I though he said, “I still think that we should have let the following coutries have nukes”. My bad….
What makes us better than any of those countries? We are currently occupying another nation by force.
Who are we to say what weapons they can and can’t develop?
Oh I don’t know I think N Korea is looking like an excellent option these past 2 weeks….
Look, Droid4, you sound exactly like all the sheep who float through here from time to time drinking the Fox News kool-aid. You bought all the crap that Bush & Cheney told you that they made everything safe for you. Your statements are inciting annoyance because we’ve heard it all before, and it’s all a load of BS. Try expanding your horizons past Sean Hannity and you might learn something.
And you sound just like every other Liberal extremist who wants to here everything they want to her and not get the truth. Look around we haven’t been attacked by Al Qaeda since 9/11, so don’t go saying we weren’t safe. You need to try and debate your case instead of immediately saying that your right, it will get you nowhere. I’m fine with you stating your case, but don’t say mine is just wrong.
Okay, man, I totally called strawman before when peeps were bashing your grammar, but this is just too much lose in one fell swoop.
Dude. Check your work, already!
Okay this is a text window, I’m not going for a grammar award.
It’s hard to take someone seriously who won’t take the time to put together a coherent argument. Your words above detracted from your sentiment in a very fundamental way.
Neatness counts, man. Get used to it.
No one expect perfect spelling and grammar, they’d never be able to produce it themselves 100% of the time! I think what HST is saying is to try and keep it to a minimum. I think we all get into the heat of the debate sometimes and fire off responses without looking at them (I’m so guilty of this) so looking over your stuff is always a good thing.
^^^^
THAT!
But what’s wrong with saying the Liberal extremities want a hearing but they don’t want her to get false teeth?
Exactly!
Wait, whut…???
I’m with him, what???
yes
Wait…. wasn’t it no?
droid4 — hate to break it to you, but the liberals here are pretty close to centerists, with a few exceptions, and even those are fairly tame. same for most of the conservatives, with a few exceptions (but they’re more troll-wrapped-in-sheets than anything). the real far right don’t tend to stick around when they discover they can’t bluster the sane into worshiping at the altar of limbaugh & coulter
New avatar bad fairie! What is it?
thanks for noticing, it’s stonehenge – had to trim off the part that showed the lunar eclipse
but still cool. even matches the pic on my ‘dashboard’ here 
I thought it was Stonehenge, but I wasn’t sure.
*ding ding ding* We have a winner…
*jumps up and down* Really?! What I win, what I win, what I win?!
+1 internetz, Jane! And a year’s supply of Turtle Wax.
Yay!!! I’ll use it to polish my internetz.
Nothing. Saddam would have gone on being a bastard, but there are plenty more bastards out there whose countries we don’t invade. He was hamstrung, his military a joke, with no possibility of creating or using WMDs because of the embargo. He would probably have died soon anyway, the guy was pretty old.
But that’s beside the point. Saddam had nothing to do with 9/11 or Al Qaeda. We had no rational reason to invade him, he had done nothing to us.
Except try to take out Bush Sr. Everyone can see that invading Iraq was simply vendetta and nothing more. Now look what we have. Instead of sending planes up to patrol two lines of demarcation and expending some fuel, we’re now trying to prop up a country and spending billions. Yeah Droid, that was fscking brilliant move to invade.
-
Personally I suggest you go back under the bridge. You’re out of you’re depth.
Fine then lets just say this, I have my views you have yours. We don’t have to agree, I’m just stating what I believe.
Ok, but let me add this, it’s fine to believe in something but when the facts are laid out and you still hold onto that belief, you will end up looking foolish. A prime example if the Flat Earth Society.
Okay then,
1. We should have planned the invasion better waited and figured out what was going on, I get that.
2. But we had just been attacked on our own soil, we had to find the culprits, and bring them to justice.
3. Invading Iraq probably could have gone better, but we had to do something.
(my opinion)
If someone breaks into your house and kills your wife, you could run around the neighborhood killing everyone in sight and then declare “I had to do something!” That defense isn’t going to wash in a court of law.
Exactly. We had just been attacked on our own soil by someone other than Iraq, or anyone associated with Iraq, or anyone living in Iraq. The only real justification for invading Iraq was that it was run by a crazy tinpot dictator who might be dangerous to others and probably shouldn’t be allowed scissors, much less control of a nation. BUT, to be fair, that probably applies to several other countries as well, and we didn’t invade them.
That is correct we should have been more decisive, we would have had an easier time if we had been.
What we should have done, Droid, is go after those responsible for the attack. Even your hardcore liberal is in favor of bringing the Al Queda to justice. Invading Iraq had nothing to do with the War on Terror. It was a war on Iraq. End of story. Now we’re stuck here with buyer’s remorse on that money pit of a country.
Eric, you need to stop going through all these and simply bashing me. I didn’t do anything to you, so why don’t you just state YOUR case.
Pakistan offered to give Bin Laden to a neutral country where he could have been tried and executed properly. No country would have dared tried him and let him go, with the sentiment of the world on our side, and the “soft power” we could have brought to bear on them. Instead, we used the deaths of 3000 people to justify starting a war that’s killed (depending on your source) between 100,591 (iraqbodycount.org) and 655,000 (as of June 2006, according to the Lancet) civilians. Kind of hard to maintain the moral high ground under those circumstances.
See Eric, PortlandMark made his case and didn’t say that we were wrong. I don’t totally agree with his statement, but he said it decently.
It would have been better if we had finished it quickly, if we had done something like the surge at the end sooner it would have spared lives. We were too wishy washy about it, if we were going to be wishy washy we should not have gone in.
Iraq had nothing to do with Al Qaeda or 9/11. Bush himself has admitted that.
I really don’t care if you think Bush didn’t do his job, come back in a few months when the next recession hits(better known as Obama’s recession) an well see what you think.
And you make sure to come back in a few months when the pink unicorns descend from the heavens and eat all our mashmallows.
*hides marshmallows*
CURSE YOU, PINK UNICORNS! Socialists, the lot of them.
Yes, and Obama the Socialist master would be riding them
Oh my f*cking god that would be Teh Awsum! I would gladly give all my marshmallows if Obama rode on up on a pink unicorn.
Gotta agree, Jane.. that would be like ZOMG!!
Not me! He’s not getting my marshmallows, and I want my own pink unicorn!! They get good gas mileage I hear…
Specially if you give them carrots…
Dude, pay attention!! They eat MARSHMALLOWS. And if Obama can find the pink unicorns, then he sure as hell better be able to find Osama Bin Laden, dammit!!
Would you shuuut uuupp! I said carrots, I was talking about something else. Why do you care?
wanderama, we need to start the bi-partisan defence of mallows! No-one gets my mallows, I will defend them nonviolently to the death. I’ll eat every last one right now if I have to!
I’m in! They will have to pry my marshmallows out of my cold dead hands!!
*shoots you both with tranquilizers and walks off with your marshmellows. Disappears*
Then I come and show you picture of Michael Jackson in thirty years, you Die, I get marshmallows:)
*passes out with mouth stuffed full of slowly dissolving mallows, smiling ear to ear*
Ha! You got the marshmellows! My evil plan worked, you got the decoy. *happily slinks off with bag of marshmAllows*
Is that some kind of pot grown in the Everglades?
That’s why he went for it! I know my decoys.
Unfortunately, he no longer has the right to ride unicorns- according to some tabloid I saw in the grocery store today, Michelle is trying to squash a story about Obama’s gay lover (lmfao!)
Yeah, I saw that in the Grocery store the other day and as I was walking out heard one guy say to his wife, “well, I guess Obama’s gay” and she’s like, “where’d you hear that?” and he goes, “well it’s written right there”. It was disheartening, to say the least.
I just want to know WTF a “mashmallow” is… anybody?
I think it’s one of those tricky disguised foods. It looks like a marshmallow but it’s made from mashed potatoes.
You know, for kids.
+1 internet for the first quote-recognizer…
Are you from Muncie too?!?!?
(I am very pleased that I’ve ignited a thread about marshmallows, and quite embarrassed that I typo’d)
Ding Ding Ding!!!
*hands over smore-flavored internet*
Fight on, fight on, dear old Muncie/Fight on, hoist the gold and blue/You’ll be tattered, torn, and hurtin’/Once the Munce is done with you/Go… Eagles!
You need to expand your time frame. If anything, it will probably take at bit longer for any changes Obama makes to become noticable. And let me add, that I don’t swoon over Obama everytime I see his face, in fact I didn’t vote for him. It sounds like you’re almost hoping he fails.
I don’t hope he fail, I just no he is going to. I wish the best to my President, but if keeps this track record were going down.
I just no you can learn to spell better.
And use his grammar better too!
If keeps this up were half to talk with hymn.
I no how to spell and use grammar, I should have reread my comment thats all.
Now you’re doing it on purpose. LOL
Dude, I don’t want to hear about how you use your grammar, OK? That’s just…eugh. That’s worse than the McCain/Lieberman thing froo’s got going.
I don’t know if ANYthing is worse than froo’s McCain/Lieberman shower thing. I’m still getting flashbacks!
It was a bath. Now bask in the mental image. BASK, DAMMIT!!
Actually, I think you only specified that they were washing each other, you didn’t mention the method used for said washing.
*grabs sb’s bic*
Scarecrow: I haven’t got a brain… only straw.
Dorothy: How can you talk if you haven’t got a brain?
Scarecrow: I don’t know… But some people without brains do an awful lot of talking… don’t they?
Dorothy: Yes, I guess you’re right.
I have to fight more Liberals on here than you’ll ever have to fight Conservative, so don’t get onto me for a few misspells
Technically, you don’t have to fight at all…
Just throwin’ it out there.
If I don’t say something there isn’t anything to stop all this Bush battering, or at least oppose it
So by your estimation Bush is being treated unfairly? And you don’t think he deserves any of it?
-
Wow.. I mean, just wow..
No, Bush did and doesn’t deserve all the crap the media gives him every day. Obama doesn’t have to worry about that though, the media(cept FOX) loves him….
So, by that I guess we should lay off Clinton as well?
You said “lay off Clinton!”
Oh hell lay and Clinton in the same sentence is not an oxymoron you know!
Oh gosh, do we really have to make bad Clinton jokes….
Why was Bill Clinton so reluctant to deal with the fate of Elian Gonzalez?
Because the last time he made a decision about where to put a Cuban he was impeached.
Okay…….laughs……we really need to stop…..laughs…..making…..laughs….bad Clinton jokes
Thanks HST, I have tried and tried to remember that joke!
Not timely, but funny.
My pleasure.
Say, Did you hear what happened to Monica Lewinsky this morning?
She coughed up some new evidence.
Why do you have to stop the Bush battering? We’re entitled to our opinions too you know. Are you gonna storm into the Democratic National Convention to stop all the Republican bashing next time around too? And like I said, we’ve dealt with your kind before. Being a Republican is okay. Being a sheep isn’t.
I don’t mind other people’s opinions, I just wish you would quit singling me out to attack! I said that we need to stop battering him like an old dead horse, not that people shouldn’t have there opinions.(dooo yuooo unndderstandd meeee???)
Droid, in all honesty I don’t see any attacks by Eric. In fact, I have probably been more harsh than him. If you go back through some of the other discussions, you will see where Eric really has gone on the attack. This one isn’t it, he’s just trying to engage you in a discussion and stating his view.
::puts down the brass knuckles::
Uh, yeah, exactly. Hell, I even apologized for being this aggressive further down somewhere.
Bush deserves more battering than he’ll ever get. Him and his little dog, too!
ARGH! I can’t read past this post one more time without correcting:
It’s “Bush bashing”!!! Not “Bush Battering”!!!
One is what I do, the other is what Chang and Kang do! GET IT RIGHT ALREADY!!!
We aren’t fighting. We aren’t enemies. We are not on opposite teams. We are discussing politics. You could simply try to put your ideas out there rather than trying to win some imaginary game.
Remember, winning an argument on the Internet is like winning a race at the Special Olympics.
I didn’t really mean win or anything, I just want to make sure that there isn’t just one side to this.
Good. Keep it up. Try not to use such inflammatory language, don’t assume that anyone who disagrees with you must be a moron, and try to cite some sources. We like disagreement, as long as it isn’t nasty.
This is true. I rather like the cut of Droid4’s jib. He’s a scrapper but a gentleman which is better mannered than myself today.
Wow, I’m not sure if I should be insulted, honored, or just creeped out….
Interesting. Does it always worry you this much when people say they like you?
Maybe not a Simpson’s fan?
Oh, is it a Simpsons reference? I watched a lot the first ten years or so, but I got out of the habit.
Isn’t “the cut of his jib” a Mr. Burns? I seem to remember him saying that a lot, is it a sailing reference? Anyone know?
Pretty much, you aren’t afraid to lock horns but you aren’t an ass either. Two very commendable traits and I salute you for it.
So please don’t be insulted, I meant it as a compliment.
Well thank you, I think that everybody should state their views and we can have a healthy debate about it, there no need to play the name game(but everything aside, there should be a law about the Clinton jokes. At least the one that have to do with him..you no, cause there getting sad…)
Definitely, I find that if your beliefs can’t handle being challenged then they simply aren’t worth having.
However, I’m also a jerk so take that wisdom as you will. Welcome to PK.
Why don’t you want Monica Lewinsky and Tonto borrowing your car?
You’ll wind up with a blown Injun.
And some of us are just inflammatory by nature. MWAHAHAHAHAAAA!!!
Uh. Sorry about that.
Anyway, I said things above that were snooty before I read the welcome wagon down here. My apologies.
Apologies accepted, as long as you don’t act like that again(or the gloves come off…I’ll hit you with the waterbording thing)
I make no promises. Just ask the other conservatives. LOL
fair enuf
I’m Not Retarded!!! MOMMY SAYS THAT I AM NUMBER ONE!!!
T_T
*munches cookie*
*pats*
Sure you are honey… Don’t forget your helmet when you get on your special bus.
YAY!!! ^_^
…and spit out that crayon.
*swallows*
What crayon?
That was my crayon, ass maggot.
*grumbles in the corner*
Yay! Tastes like purple!
You ate the LAST purple!
MY PURPLE!!!!
NOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO
by the way, Death, the *correct* spelling is “Speshull”
I tried eating a crayon once (the chalk had been confiscated) it was minging…
What the hell happened after that seventh guinness last night? It’s all starting to sound a bit worrying.
Here’s a novel idea, how about you don’t go to left leaning political websites? I don’t go to right leaning political websites, it’s bad for my blood pressure.
Dammit, Jane, you’re leaning on me again. *grumbles* Dang ol’ left leaners…git off mah lawn!
But I was sleepy! *pouts*
I for one want more diversity and understanding between all views here.
And I think that in general, the regulars here do a pretty darn good job of explaining and exploring their views and the bases for those views. Sometimes it involves a little bickering, but I think the end result’s more productive than going someplace where everyone agrees with you!
Thats a very good assumption, it’s better to talk to people that disagree with you than a bunch of people that share your thoughts. You learn more and it’s more fun.
“And I think that in general, the regulars here do a pretty darn good job of explaining and exploring their views and the bases for those views.”
With a couple notable exceptions.
very notable ones.
Generally I do too. I wrote that when I was worried Droid was going to go the troll route when in fact s/he turned out to be a very nice person. We just need to get him or her their own avatar now.
by the way, how DO you achieve avatar status?
www . gravatar . com
Take out the spaces, sign up and upload a picture, have little teeny avatar follow you about.
why, thank you goodsir.
Ahem *points to boobies*
….
Sorry, I forgot where your face was when you directed me towards your breasts.
Goodma’am?*
She has a face? Huh.
tappity-tap-tap-tap! (happy dance!)
something worked for me
Grats on the new Avatar. Where is that? At 1/2″X3/8″ it’s not clear…
Three Mile Island?
Wyoming badlands?
Baltimore?
stonehenge at a lunar eclipse – that part got trimmed oof, but it’s still cool, at least i think so
That was going to be my guess.. thanks for spoiling it for me!
and froo, thanks for the site link
1. I’m a he
2. Thanks for the recommendation to get an avatar
Well, I thought you might be but I didn’t want to assume. Tends to annoy people when you’re wrong. I like the new avatar btw, when the comment threads get really long it makes recognition easier.
Wow, if I came looking for the “We hate Bush” and “Obama is the chosen one” fan clubs, I found them
This is so much funnier than anything else here, it’s tragic that it’s unintentional. I want to laugh with him, I’m not a cruel man, but not laughing is just not an option.
Yes, welcome to America!
Yes, Land of the Taxed and Home of the Socialists!
You must make a pretty good salary if you’re complaining about higher taxes, since the majority of Americans got a tax break. That extra 3% you’re paying now must be tough. We all have our cross to bear, I suppose.
Three words: Value Added Tax. That is all.
I don’t understand it thoroughly yet, but it makes me nervous.
Kind of like my last date…
It should make you very nervous, along with cap and trade. It’s an income tax without calling it such.
I think it’s worse than that. I think it’s a tax on every time Labor improves the value of an object, thereby ensuring that US companies outsource even more labor to third world countries.
I admit, though, I might have my facts all screwed up.
The end result will be the jacking up of prices, punishing the consumer and the employee, and causing the poorer people to suffer even more as prices on retail items and energy skyrocket.
-
But I’m just a conspiracy-minded Conservo-Bot
Mark, a link for you: {http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2009/jun/01/charlie-brooker-women-men-power}
Oh I dare anyone to post that at Shakesville. The feminists would be FURIOUS. (I could almost write their reply, but they’d be a lot nastier than I could be.)
I don’t know your reference to Shakesville, but this feminist found that article hilarious!
O! M! F! G!
I am on the floor laughing right now! (Good thing the keyboard is on a long cord!)
“In truth your suspicions are correct: we’re very, very simple. We’re lazy and we like blowjobs. That’s all there is to us.”
Reminds me of a lady I once worked with who peppered me with questions for a week about what she should get her husband for his birthday.
“Well”, sez I, “he should wake up already in your mouth.”
“How about a watch with a radio in it?”
“Umm. Sure. If that’s really what you think he wants.” (sigh)
I also loved:
“The only mistake women make is crediting men with far more mystery than they’re capable of. We’re impulsive yet thuddingly predictable, and you’d better learn to love us for it because that’s just about all we can muster. That’s why we bollocksed the planet up. We didn’t mean to. We’re men, that’s all.”
Boy, you know my sense of humor, Froo!
Here’s another one for you. I’m still giggling over the line “…we have to find a snappier way to describe people’s ethnic heritage or Twitter will turn into a ghastly WASPy golf club and die of whiteness.”
-
{http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/comment/columnists/caitlin_moran/article6389710.ece
I lol’d.
Afamerimix.
HEH.
I know, I love that article. It’s wonderful. (Although disturbingly correct.)
Brought to you by President Obama and his devoted zombi…sorry follower suicide_blonde.
Really, I can’t take all the credit, there were those other 69,492,375 voters. But thanks for the gesture!
ya that probably helped…
Enjoy the experience. I know I did for eight years when all things Democratic were considered ludicrous.
The caption is funny, I don’t necessarily like it, but it is funny. BTW if we want to find out how many Left wingers are on this thread, who here hates Sean Hannity?(wait for the stamped….
Ummm, this convo would be a lot easier to follow if you used the reply button in the bottom right hand corner of the box.
I would say nearly everyone from both sides. What’s your point? How about this one:
-
How many people here hate Nancy Pelosi?
-
I do! And I’ve been hating on that b*tch since she was in local government in California (along with Diane Feinstein and Barbara Boxer.)
NDB = Non-Directional Beacon.
Just sayin’
True..
Who? Never heard of him. Is he some sort of terrorist? Sean… sounds Irish, is he with the IRA?
You know, given the financial situation lately, I wonder if many of us would have been better off investing in that IRA than Individual Retirement Accounts.
I actually asked my Dad if my IRA could go negative
I’ve only been saving for two years and I lost $1300. But seriously that was like 40% of it! I can’t imagine what people who had a lot saved up lost.
My colleague is 64 and she’s lost half her retirement savings already.
Speaking of terrorists, who here thinks that if we find someone who commits a murder, belongs to groups that promote violence in opposition to the US government, and has bomb making supplies at his house, we should waterboard them to find out what other attacks are being planned?
*snerk* Obvious trap is obvious
If all is fair, sure.
Perspective is everything in a case like this. Out of curiosity, how many of you guys would waterboard Goebbels if you knew you’d get Hitler? (as a hypothetical. I’m comparing neither a homegrown terrorist nor a Middle Eastern one to Hitler, rather performing a mental stretching exercise to show the other side)
Well as a Prophet of the all seeing but not so forgiving Wang, sure. We torture one terrorist, let’s do another. I here if you send into enough Jihadist skin belts, you get a free decoder ring.
Personally, I’d turn him over to the FBI, where they’d subject him to some good cop/bad cop, and get the information without compromising our principles.
Once we had him, though, I’d gladly perform the execution for you. I’m not squeamish about killing people who need it, I just believe in things like “due process” and “proven beyond reasonable doubt”. That’s me, just another whacko who thinks the US Constitution is a pretty good document.
I agree. Here’s the kicker though: A lot of people don’t. In the case that I think you’re trying to bait me with (the abortion doctor, right?), the feelings of the guy decrying the killer while not feeling sorry for the death can be explained as such:
-
If you were a Jew from the Nazi prison camps, or if your family had died there, would you feel any type of remorse had Hitler been dragged through the streets behind a truck by some rednecks?
-
Extreme example, sure. But here’s the kicker: People on the right (not everyone, but a large number) consider the abortion movement to be mass genocide, and equate those who perform abortions to Hitler, Stalin, and other mass murderers. Now, I’m not saying that they are correct in their feelings of no remorse for the doctor’s death, far from it. But, I’m saying that I understand where they’re coming from based on the perspective of their arguments.
-
The logical side of my brain is pissed that an innocent man who was following the law was shot for no good reason.
The emotional side of my brain has trouble feeling sorry for him on behalf of the children who weren’t given a chance at life.
It’s an extremely difficult struggle. And not one that is easy to identify for those on the “other side”.
I’m really not all that fussed about Doctor Tiller’s death, to be honest; there are too many undeserved murders out there daily to be worried about him in particular. I’m more upset by PVT. Thomas E. Lee, III, of Dalton, GA, killed on May 29 in Mosul, Iraq. At least I’m unconflicted about what he was doing with his life.
I’m very upset that a brown person, of Islamic faith, would be treated differently. I don’t want this one Christian ***hole tortured, I want *certain people* to realize that that there should only be one standard of behavior for captured criminals. Scott Roeder’s treatment is the treatment all criminals should receive: arrest, indictment, trial, and punishment. Not a rush to assume guilt and summary judgement.
I assume you feel the same about Abdul Hakim Mujahid Muhammad who murdered an innocent recruiter the other day and wounded another, for political and religious reasons? He was a Muslim, so I know it’s hard.
Try him, find him guilty, and sentence him appropriately. If you need someone to pull the switch, you can reach me here.
(SOB kills our soldiers, he deserves whatever the law says.)
(that violent shudder you feel was the earth shaking off its axis as a righty and a lefty agree)
lol
Why should he be treated any differently than someone who murders in cold blood who *isn’t* Muslim? He murdered two people, it was on American soil, try and convict and put him to death.
Yet the president and the DOJ remain silent on it, despite that Muslim jihadists are up to 628 deaths in jihadi attacks THIS MONTH alone. Link Meanwhile, one single abortion doctor dead in over 10 years is cause the smear the entire pro-life movement, most conservatives, and most conservative commentators.
Yes, both should be tried and fried. Yet only one leads to national outrage. Go figure.
Proofreading fail.
Although, to be accurate, he did even worse. I would sentence all recruiters to be used car salesmen following their enlistments; the men he attacked were innocent infantrymen volunteering for extra duty while on leave. Gods grant their families peace and happiness.
I have a comic for you. {http://www.salon.com/comics/tomo/2009/06/02/tomo/index.html?source=rss&aim=/comics/tomo}
No way! That’s the funniest thing I’ve seen in weeks! Dead on commentary, imo. I loooove Tom Tomorrow, and that’s one of his best. (scoffs) And you guys say liberals don’t make jokes at Obama’s expense!
Did the Teleprompter tell you to say that, Mark? *stern look*
THAT was a joke at Obama’s expense? I’ve really heard everything now.
Let’s see…lack of facial expression, obvious reading from the teleprompter, horrible lack of timing on jokes, not to mention bad jokes to begin with………if they had added Dumbo ears it would have been pretty much par for the course. There isn’t a whole hell of a lot more they can do with Obama, other than make fun of his “date night”. The dude’s too squeaky clean. He knows how to delegate.
Actually, I was referring to the willingness to overlook past criminal behavior in the service of “moving forward”, but whatever…
Now I *KNOW* the Teleprompter told you to say that, Mark. Come on, own up to it!!!!
(scoffs) Come on, you know I can’t even read! (points at self) HellOOOO! Public education here!
Obama’s squeaky clean? LOL – where have you BEEN?
In terms of what they got Clinton on, and the fact that all of the stuff they throw at him doesn’t stick (for whatever reason), yeah, he’s pretty much Teflon and squeaky at this point. All of the stuff that could be pinned on him, he’s got plausible deniability in. “It wasn’t me, it was that guy” works for him because it can’t be proven that his hands are dirty. His delegating finger may be dirty, and his colleagues certainly are, but he himself is not.
Hmm, Froo; sounds a lot like Reagan and the Iran/Contra scandal to me!
Gee, one scandal, can’t you do better than that??? *crosses arms and taps toes*
-
-
Obama has three and a half years to forget to wipe his prints, don’t think I won’t dance around your naked corpse yelling “I told you so!!!!” when he gets caught!
-
Of course, I expect the same if Cheney goes up on charges of war crimes
Fair enough little one.
(shy cough)
You don’t happen to have a sister living on the west coast, do you?
Sadly, no. My only sister is married and living in a pin dot of a town in East Texas.
-
Now, I am adopted, so I might have a blood related sister out there of whom I am not aware…………. *thoughtful*
-
Admit it, it was the thought of me dancing around your naked corpse, wasn’t it???
Haha! Cheney’s so bad*ss even his HEART can’t kill him!
Thompson/Cheney 2012!
Rasputin/Cheney 2012!
Kahn/Bonaparte 2012!
Here’s my other as* cheek for you. Be sure to kiss it!
Wow, that was completely uncalled for. Stay classy, doll.
And on a related note: Ramses/Lestat 2012!
Cthulhu/Tempes 2012
Kirk/Crane 2012. The sex appeal and sheer hubris would make the White House explode.
Spock/Data 2012
The logical choice…
Clinton/Shore 2012
Lock up your interns….
LOL.
you two are terrific.
Thanks!
Hightower/Tackleberry 2012
The choice for the honest policeman.
Zombie Farley/Spade 2012.
‘Cuz politics r funneh.
Zombie Belusi/ Zombie Farley 2012
They just want to tickle your funny bone. With their teeth…
ROFL!!!!
Zombie Candy for Secretary of Health and Human Services…
Carey/Carey 2012
Alrighty then…
Kirk/Picard 2012
To baldly go where every man has gone before… Again and again.
I don’t think those were the cheeks Jesus was talking about, Anniee.
then again….
Hey, I had to TRY it. For Seth.
Link for AC
Veritas, is that you? It SURE explains a lot if it is. If not, move along.
Oh, link obviously.