Corrupt nutjob resigns
Breaking News – Corrupt nutjob resigns. Predictably, blames media
(Sarah Palin)
Picture by: dunno source. Caption by: fastfood via Breaking News Builder
You May Like:
Show Only: Democrats | Republicans | Media | Military
« Previous I thought the simulators would be more realistic. | North Korea shouldn’t mess with a country that celebrates freedom by blowing stuff up Next »
» 569 comments
-
Recent Comments
mabsba on WOOPS Nucky, the Official … on WOOPS Aremis on WOOPS keithybabes on WOOPS Endarkened on Let’s imagine the look o… The Steve on WOOPS Endarkened on Let’s imagine the look o… Rando the Filthiest,… on Let’s imagine the look o… deadinfrance on Let’s imagine the look o… deadinfrance on Let’s imagine the look o… 
Cheezburger Network Blog
Meh…
So, Toilet Maker, you’ve resigned your job taste-testing hallucenagens & psychotics?
“Hallucinogens”
Must be a haluhaluhalucinacinacinationtiontion………
you read my mind
WOW! Sarah Palin resigned?!?! I had no idea! She must be done with politics forever and I will celebrate by making over 9000 LOL’s about it!
Yes, that was sarcasm, and I know it has nothing to do with the first comment; but maybe people will read this and STOP MAKING SARAH PALIN LOL’S. THEY’RE NOT FUNNY ANYMORE! Seriously, these are going to be the next overused LOL’s. Just as bad as the Bush ones.
If only LOLPalin was as good as LOLPutin. =\
There are no bad bush lols (that guy was hilarious, oh wait he was serious… oh well)
Bring on the Palin jokes!
No, thanks, we’ve had enough of those damn things. Put in the search box “Palin”. Look through there for the Palin jokes, we don’t want any more Palin on the damn page.
Funny. We don’t really want any more of her in the real world, either. (And as an Alaskan, I feel like I get to say that.)
Well Igor is more respected so I’ll listen to him about the Palin jokes.
Aren’t you all just proving her point?
Page after page devoted to hate toward her and page after page devoted to hero worship of Obama. Never even the slighted giggle at the minor things he does – never mind the big things – he is infallible and Palin is the devil – we get it.
Keep up the good work.
“Aren’t you all just proving her point?”
Yes.
Not to mention the ludicrousness of TRYING to govern a state while being hounded daily by frivolous lawsuits and phony charges, spending a fortune and all your time just to acquit yourself and set the record straight – how can she possibly do her job under those circumstances? NO ONE could. She did what she had to do for the good of her state and her own family.
It really irks me that one of the ethics charges (which found no wrongdoing on her part but that she is going to come up with $10k for) was taking her children on trips at taxpayer expense when it wasn’t entirely clear that their presence was a political asset to the trip. So she’s of course paying the money out of pocket in order to make sure there is no question left on that score. Meanwhile Sasha and Malia are whooping it up in Paris and Russia and people celebrate it like it’s the assumption of Mary. I mean, COME ON – then people here have the GALL to say Palin gets treated like any other politician? Get. serious.
Actually, she didn’t pay it, her PAC did.
Soooooooooo glad this crazy bitch and her hillbilly family are nowhere near the White House.
Wow. So this is what “tolerance” looks like.
I tolerate the fact that the bitch is still alive, breathing, and reproducing. Frankly, it’s far more than she and her horrid spawn deserve, but I’m a nice guy like that.
Wow…and people say that the conservatives are the haters.
When it comes to hatefulness and viciousness, no group holds a candle to the left in this country. They vilify anyone they view as a threat to their power. They claim to be defenders of women and minorities but pass up no opportunity to savage them if they do not fall in line with liberal thinking.
this is pretty much true for the extremes of each side. the conservative attack machine is just as low and disgusting as its liberal counterpart, and both sides get to point to the excesses of the other guys as “proof” that they are somehow less to blame for the hate they cheerfully spew. the only people who truly believe that one side exhibits more hate than the other are firmly entrenched within the extreme fringe of their political view, reinforcing the hatefulness and viciousness that makes politics such a sad experience.
Yup, I perfer the middle ground. Don’t have to vote, don’t have to decide, I can bitch no matter who wins elections, and I can hate both sides as much as they hate each other.
It just might almost be that it is in man’s nature to hate. And by man I of course mean Homo Sapiens, not just males.
Actually choosing to not vote pretty much invalidates anything you have to say as well as proclaiming in a loud, ringing voice “I’m too much of a lazy douche to do my part to help my Country out.”
But hey, maybe thats just me hating on you.
Please look up the word “Satire.”
this isn’t going to be like the time I tried to find gullible is it?
It’s on the ceiling…
Don’t confuse the conservatives with the republicans. They are not the same thing anymore.
Agreed, 100%
This guy has it 100% right. The critical left AND the critical right are both full of it, and both are equally to blame for brainwashing the gullible into thinking like them.
I like the hot dog on the right better!!!!
If you think there is equal viciousness on the left and right, you need to get your head out of the sand. Add to that the fact that most of the media is in the pocket of the far left (and if you don’t believe that take a look at just about every study that has been done on the subject) and you get every ridiculous accusation made by idiots on the Huffington Post or the Daily Kos plastered all over every news outlet. “Trig is not really Palin’s child” or “John McCain is having an affair with a lobbyist” or most recently by a staff member at the Huffington post “Palin is quitting governorship to run for president on a platform of ‘more retardation’” I am not a big Palin fan but you people are ridiculous.
I don’t feel compelled to bash you, just to ask nicely that you take off the tinfoil suit and grow up… It happens both ways, and if you can’t see that then you need to take YOUR head out of the sand.
I didn’t say it doesn’t happen on both sides. Perhaps you need to practice your reading comprehension. I just pointed out that it’s not equal in either viciousness or distribution.
I know what you said. What I meant by both sides was this- Obama got 52% of the vote. Doesn’t that mean there will be *almost* as many people spewing hatred and vitriol, or is it just the left that really has the intense vitriol, because I’ve seen more than my fair share of republi-trolls on the internet, and it just seems like they’re about equal, to me. Of course, I’ve only been surfing the web since age 8, so what do I know.
“so what do I know.”
Obviously not much. The voting percentages have nothing to do with which side has the most people that are willing to engage in the viciousness we are discussing. The percentages also have nothing to do with the distribution advantages one side has over the other.
I thought of that, but I also thought it would average out in a nation of over 300 million people. So, because we’re liberals, we’re more likely to engage in hate tactics/taunting/spewing vitriol/foaming at the mouth? Oh, okay, that makes sense.
ridiculous is omitting the ongoing viciousness that is cheney, rove, malkin, beck, hannity, savage, coulter, o’reilly and limbaugh (and let’s not forget palin herself), who have no compunction about distorting every little jot of a rumor into a screed against obama and liberals. is obama a secret muslim? was he even born in this country? is he pals with terrorists? photos of watermelon patches in front of the white house, obama in a hitler moustache, insinuations about a quadripeligic veteran running for office, the swift boaters, remarks made about a thirteen-year-old chelsea clinton…
radical conservatives have a long and storied track record of low, underhanded hate-driven activity that gets conveniently forgotten whenever they start to blame liberals for hate in politics. anyone who can believe that liberals have more than cons is using a very selective method of gauging the hate.
Well put!
@yea, right – yea, right! Well said.
My bet is that you haven’t read or listened to many of the individuals you list by name as “vicious”. If you had, you would know that the accusation is unfounded in most of their cases. But, why would you bother with facts, or listening to those you disagree with in order to try to understand what they are trying to say and why? And a “track-record of low, underhanded, hate-driven activity”? You really need to think a bit. What you wrote is all those things and more. It is ignorant. Radicalism at ALL points in the political AND religious spectrum has historically produced despicable behavior, including lies and violence. But, right now, if you want to see hate and violence, in the U.S., you can find it more easily on the left than on the right.
Click the link
There was a news reporter on MacLehrer during the time Clarence Thomas was installed in the SCOTUS who said that she “hope his wife feeds him a lot of eggs and butter and that he, as so many black men do, gets a heart attack.” Name one reporter on Fox or anywhere else who makes statements like that about Obama or any other leftist. It’s not to be found.
Then there’s Janeane Garofalo who goes on Olbermann and says that ALL conservative people of color are mentally disturbed, self-loathing, and have Stockholm syndrome, that Michael Steele is just a self-loathing black man, and that all conservative women are Eva Braun, Squeaky Fromme types with Stockholm syndrome as well. She’s the biggest racist/misogynist I’ve ever seen speak in modern times and I decided as Olbermann sat there nodding his approval and smirking, that the left was NEVER going to lecture me on racism, feminism, or ANYTHING of moral value ever again. They have lost any shred of credibility on the “tolerance” side, permanently.
Hateful viscous people are hateful and viscous regardless of partisan affiliation.
Please don’t lump me in the same group as some @sshole just because we share a few political views.
“Hateful viscous people are hateful and viscous regardless of partisan affiliation.”
I just hate it when people are of a glutinous nature or consistency; sticky, thick and adhesive. Especially when they’re hateful as well. Just ruins my day.
Lol..I missed that typo. Yeah, viscous people are not my favorite. The worst is when you sit somewhere right after one of ‘ems gotten up; the ooze gets on your clothes.
AMBER DNA FTW!!
There are looney tunes on both sides. Don’t blame the left for that. I know the total assholes on the right are not the majority as well.
I get to be TAZ if we’re being looney tunes!!!
Pleeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeease can I be roadrunner?
Do I get to be Daffy Duck?
I realize she’s an Animaniacs character and not Looney Tunes, but I call Slappy Squirrel.
Now that’s comedy!
Slappy rocks.
Then again, I’m partial to squirrels…
I want to be Chicken Boo.
Dot! I call Dot!
I think that liberals are just jealous of Palin because she’s the only woman in politics who doesn’t look like a man.
But she’s tough as nails – I’d pit her against any ten bike-riding, designer-shirt-wearing metro pussies any day.
Again we see the compassionate, tolerant left rearing it’s head again. It’s just a shame that your abortionist friends didn’t get to Sarah sooner or she wouldn’t have had her down-syndrome child.
Yes! Abortions for everyone, on me! Because THAT’S our real goal.
BabyRitas all around!
Yea, real funny. Not.
Yikes, please don’t interfere with the really, really old once-were funny jokes.
And if you don’t like dead baby jokes, don’t comment bud
Tyler, I’m not a bud, I’m a bud-ette, and I don’t think abortion is funny, and I’m not one to keep my mouth shut. Sorry if you don’t think I fit in. Also, this is a public comment board, how could anyone possibly “interfere”?
I’m sorry if I offended you, but it’s an ongoing joke between Jane and Ivan, and I’d kind of leave it to them. They’re not going to stop, and I’m sure it was in response to a troll, so I’d just say to leave it alone, y’know? Not trying to be rude :/
By all mean, hon! They can say whatever they like and so can I. It’s a public board.
Y’see, neocons think atheists get together and have parties, and at those parties, we give each other abortions and hang crosses upside down. Hence the BabyRita joke. Comment all you like. As you say, it’s a public board. Just be prepared to look the fool when you intrude on an inside joke.
Ivan, that’s not what we’re supposed to do at our parties?
Actually, I’m an agnostic. They probably think even LESS of me.
Still don’t think it’s funny, and no, don’t think I look like a fool! Enjoy!!
You forgot the part where we rim the class with the salt we extracted from Republican tears!
GLASS!!! Not class. Sheesh, that had a whole ‘nother meaning!
Yessss, tasty, tasty Republican tears…
How do you unload a truckful of dead babies?
With a pitchfork.
Hilarious link. (Foamy the squirrel!)
I thought you were supposed to throw in a free toaster with each abortion?
Wow. I thought liberals were for tolerance and for bringing about a new age of America where we care and help others.
Oh, wait that was just Obamaganda. Liberals are really just psychotic fascists who wish for the raping and killing of anything that gets in their way apparently.
Forget that every charge against her has been false, forget that most voters thought she was Tina Fey. Forget that Obama has backpedaled on every campaign promise.
Nice to see someone proving that Obama and his supporters are liars.
I’m not sure why but I read that as “obamagasms”
Now THATS obama worship
remember when obama said that republicans were old, racist, white guys? i do.
clinging to their guns and religion? or was that another time?
U MAKE ME SICK. I JUST CANT BELIEVE SOME MORAN WOULD DO THIS TO ANOTHER HUMAN. ******* TRY LOOKING AT UR OWN FLAWS INSTED************
All caps are not your friend, dude. And learn to spell before trying to make a point. Geez.
*imagines PF in front of a sheet on YouTube, sobbing* Leave Sarah ALONE! Just LEAVE HER ALONE!!!!11!!1elebenty!!1!! *mascara runs*
And WHAT is a “moran”? Erin Moran, perhaps?
There was, and I say was because they’re all dead from a gangland war, a family called the Moran’s down this way. I wonder if that’s who PF meant?
See the link for the answer.
That guy is just pissed off because they left him out of the inbreeding program.
… I believe this a joke… Please tell me this is a joke?
You just can’t tell anymore, I suspect people from one side post beyond the pale comments from the other side to make each other look like nuts… That’s all I got…
Angry poster is angry.
…and yelly.
Where exactly do you come up with corrupt or crazy with her?
Check thread “A Winner Never Quits and…”
I hate cliches. They’re SO passe’.
I suppose the fact that all the ethics enquiries that have been resolved thus far have concluded that she did nothing wrong doesn’t mean anything to you. Figures. Why deal with facts when you can deal with innuendo and bitter hatred for those who disagree with you.
“I suppose the fact that all the ethics enquiries that have been resolved thus far have concluded that she did nothing wrong doesn’t mean anything to you.”
Yeah, pretty much.
**chuckles** I sure hope that was sarcasm!!!
she did nothing wrong. therefore, she’s corrupt.
normal behavior is to do something wrong.
Right, we can’t trust people like that!
Well she is a politician so she did do something wrong, but just not as much as other politicians.
Reminds me of the line in Dogma:
To believe that a woman got pregnant witoout sex is faith, but to believe that she never got it on is just ignorant!!! (probably butchered it hence no quotes).
In other words: To believe a politician is innocent of the current charge is faith, but to beleive they did nothing wrong is just ignorant.
well, at PK the only politicians to blame are repubs
I dunno…believing a woman got pregnant without having sex seems pretty ignorant to me…
Not really. But I’m not above paranoia either. I have no proof that she did anything wrong, and if they cleared her, well whoopdeshit. Doesn’t mean I have to buy it.
Ah, yes … Why deal with facts when you can rely on unfounded opinion? It’s so much easier than dealing with the harsh light of reality!
I don’t really buy it either. I’d just like to see a lol calling out someone else for a change.
Are you serious, sopranomom?
No…please Nalin bestow upon us your politcal wisdom of what Palin did that was corrupt (factual info would be nice).
Uh, yeah, I think she’s serious “nailin”. You guys need to quit drinking the koolaid.
But it’s cherry!
And anything with a cherry has to be tasty!
-Wink wink-
You know, sometimes, bearded clams have cherries in them, Eddie?
Ugh.
She looks like a man
You might get your vision checked. It seems to be a little faulty.
Does that mean Tina Fey looks like a man? B/c I didn’t think men had such curves, nice rack, and great set of stems (sorry for being sexist, but fight fire with ummmmm dumb assery)
I think you like more than just peanut butter,
Boobies!!!!!! Sorry what?!?!
Not that I have any experience, just from what I have heard, but you should visit Thailand. They supposedly have guys like that there.
They’ve got some pretty men down there, that’s for sure. Those Thai girls just can’t win. They’re gorgeous, have to keep up with what society decides is beauty, and then they get beaten out by the boys. It’s gotta be rough.
True, except for that pesky little Ethics Commission in her state keeps finding her ‘not guilty’ or that the ethics charges are ‘unfounded’….you know, that DEMOCRAT-CONTROLLED Ethics Commission…she’s 16 for 16, ya know! *wink*
Nice, I like it.
Dude, please no facts! There are “progressives” here being all smart and stuff! Don’t introduce reality into the mix.
(link)
So the report that specifically states “palin found guilty of power abuse” is meaningless? Which by the way was commissioned by a majority of republicans.
One night in Bancock…….
….makes a hard man humble;
Not much between despair and ecstasy….
One night in Bangkok…
and the tough guys tumble…
Can’t be too careful with your company
I can feel the devil walking next to me….
She still looks like a man tho. A creepy pedophile man
You said that…. twice. We get it man. You think she looks like a man.
Ya know. She kinda looks like a man.
She is scaring me and my lolcat
Can we assume then, by your oh-so-clever moniker, that you’re into dudes?
Zing!!
He was making a joke. Geez.
Yes, and I thought it was funny and clever. That’s why I said “Zing”, which is shorthand for the above comment is funny… and clever. Geez.
Eric’s comment was directed towards jbug, yikes
How did you know that!? Oh well, if it was then I withdraw my “Geez”.
It was aimed at jbug for his/her stupid joke, and you zinging it. You both missed Nailin’s joke.
Probably because it wasn’t funny.
So was I. Geez.
I think calling her corrupt is pretty unfair. Just because you don’t like her doesn’t make her corrupt. There are plenty of sleazy corrupt politicians, and she may be one of them, but what ever happened to innocent until proven guilty?
I would accept the nutjob crack, she’s a bit crazy, but in an unconventional and weird sort of way, not in an axe murdering dangerous criminal sort of way.
She seems like a nice enough lady, I wouldn’t vote her into an elected office…still isn’t a good reason to throw around wild, unfounded accusations.
She’s not crazy…She’s Alaskan. Things are different there. You pretty much have to be a survivalist at heart or else you wouldn’t make it through one winter.
It’s obvious you have never lived in Alaska.
The place does have cities and civilization.
No kidding! But it’s still a different world for the rest of the US. And she, and her family didn’t come from money at all…they live by filling their freezers with fish and game and going to (dare I say it) Wal-Mart! She’s not a nut job…she’s a normal person in a political office, rather than a career politician, or part of a family that has been in political office for 50+ years. Just because she’s not part of the “social elite” doesn’t make her a nut job…it makes her NORMAL.
oh please, “social elite”. She views herself as a card carrying member of the “moral elite”.. whats the difference? People in the “Social elite” happen to live a more privileged lifestyle.. people in the “moral elite” cross all social levels.. and find themselves superior to others.
Moral eilte, because she doesn’t belive in abortion? Or becasue she believes in God and not just herself? Or because she believes in personal freedoms? Heck, the social elite are all over the political offices in this country. Because they are in office (never mind that they are supposed to work for US) they must know more than we do, and they must know what is better for every person in thes country, more than we would know for ourselves… They throw our votes out the window, and just go do whatever the hell they want. THAT is the social elite!
You must have missed the memo — all Christians are required, by command of Jesus, to impose their views on others with force. Even if they say they won’t, or have made absolutely no move to do so, they’re just lying in wait until they’re in a position of power.
No, that’s Islam.
You’d think so, but then look at the number of people who parrot “she wants to force her religion on me”…
Well that’s b/c she used the G word…. Hey I love turning the sprinkler on the religious zealots going door to door with the rest of them, but I hate when people put me in that category b/c I bleieve in God, Jesus rose from the dead to clear us of our sins, and Mary M, was one smoking hotty!!!!
I guess if she went to a church where there was a racist preacher for 20 years people would feel better about her…
Hmmm…I suppose the witch hunt preacher doesn’t qualify?
Was he a racist?
No I don’t think so, but I do believe he wore black.
Nah, but like Wright, he was a controversial nutjob.
Wright was controversial? Wow I had no idea.
Right on!
Wow, and you call us Christians intolerant and hateful….
She is a member of the “moral elite” because she governs according to her personal ideology. She is a member of the “moral elite” because she thinks that gays dont deserve rights. She is a member of the “moral elite” because she doesn’t believe that women have the right to choose what they want to do with thier own bodies. She is a member of the “moral elite” because she wants to teach ABSTINENCE ONLY sex-ed in schools, which by looking at her daughter DOES NOT WORK! She is a member of the “moral elite” because she wants creationism taught in public schools, despite the fact that there is SCIENTIFIC PROOF to support evolution.
She is a member of the “moral elite” because she thinks that others are below her because SHE is “moral” because many christians believe “morality” is linked with being “religious” which couldn’t be farther from the truth.
Cite or it didn’t happen.
I met an Alaskan once. He didn’t seem crazy or corrupt.
you do realize that she was using Federal funds for herself and tried to get a police officer fired so he couldnt see his child because she was a friend of the mother dont you? That she took hundreds of thousands of dollars for clothes and took pay-backs for state construction bids.
Ipso facto: corrupt.
read a book
Which book should I read that would outline the illegal activities she participated in, as well as the sentencing by the judges finding her guilty?
Rumors, speculation, and website blogs are not evidence.
This is America you half-brained twit, no matter how much I dislike her, she’s innocent until proven guilty in a court of law.
If it was “your party/candidate” being accused of corruption you would be up in arms defending them. As mentioned above a democrat controlled ethics committee has repeatedly found the allegations to be frivolous.
**Stands next to The Steve sticks out hand** I was wrong about you. I’m not the biggest fan of Palin (a little too religious for me), but to sling accusatoins that were proven wrong, and she was cleared of is ridiculous. I don’t understand why the liberals don’t like her much. The media has curcified her and her family more so than any other female politician. Where’s WOW? Where’s all the women’s group there to protect her from QUITE a few sexist attacks. I have a feeling if the right went with as much vigor against a Democratic Candidate they way the left went after Palin, there would be quite a bit of defense for that person. The problem with the liberal agenda, it’s berate a candidate to the point where you try and make it embarrassing to support them. Vice actually attacking the policies, it’s attack the person. (Conservative agenda does it to a point, but we don’t have seem to get it right).
The liberals don’t like her because she has the most potential to be truly effective for the conservatives. She could be the person to bring back the unity among the conservatives.
The conservatives are going to have a difficult time winning anything unless they kick the extreme religious right to the curb or at least tone them down. There are simply too many atheists, and other religions in this nation to run a successful platform on Christianity. They can’t even get ALL of the Christians to vote republican as it is!
Not only that, any Christian should know that legislating your values on others is not what it’s all about. Spread the word and share your experiences, but you can’t and shouldn’t force people to live by your values, they must choose to follow the path.
The Steve: Isn’t that kinda what the left is doing to America as well? I mean look at California (VERY liberal state) where the Gay Marriage ban was upheld in an election process, yet people are still moving forward with getting it overturned. (Once again I’m pro gay marriage, but prefer civil union) Isn’t that pushing the Gay Marriage “moral” onto people who believe it’s wrong? Isn’t that what President Obama is doing with his “spread the wealth” campaign? I’m pushing the moral that “you owe society your hard earned money” for the good of society “moral” on me. Wasn’t it Biden who said something along the guideline of it’s every American’s moral obligation to spread the wealth (or something like that)? Or Obama’s pushing his morals onto the American people by releasing Gitmo prisoners into the United States?
I already give to charity. Imagine what will happen to private donations and some charities when taxes go up so the government can decide who should get your money? It will kill a lot of them that do a lot of good.
…you do know you are supposed to claim those donations on your taxes, and in turn you get a larger tax refund. See, since you’ve already given to charity the government gives you a break and taxes you less.
Your point is invalid.
Only if you itemize.
Well, if getting money back for charitable donations is important enough to yikes, then that’s what yikes should do.
Only if it’s more than the standard deduction. Well, that’s the only way it would make sense financially, anyway.
It’s not about that, it’s about how much money I have available to give, if taxes continue to rise I won’t be able to give as much. Charities will suffer. Is it that hard to understand?
The rich have PLENTY of money to donate. Why should the burden be on the middle class. I’m assuming you’re middle class, of course. I know I am.
Listen, he will raise taxes on everyone, he HAS to to pay for his programs and if we are ever going to pay off the deficit. Yes I am middle class, and I am worried about losing the middle class altogether.
The Republicans ideas tend to be harsher on the middle class. Obama’s plan has always been to cut taxes on the middle class and increase them on the upper class, who have more to spare. Raising taxes on the middle class right now would be economic suicide. Bush’s attempts during his years to help “relieve” the middle class were half-hearted at best. One of the reasons I voted for Obama was because he promised to stick the tax burden with the rich instead of the middle class.
The cap and trade thing, if passed, will effectively be a tax on everyone, our energy costs will all go up. They are also thinking about a value added or federal sales tax, also on everyone who buys stuff.
Eric: How about we burden EVERYONE equally? Why punish people for being successful? I’ve never understood that. People keep saying that the rich use more resources, however don’t they pay for those resources? What about the person making minimum wage but drives on teh same roads as the rich to get to work. Doesn’t that person use as much as the road as the rich? Just b/c the rich have more money doesn’t mean we’re entitled to it. That type of attitude scares me. That’s the road to communism. Don’t you realize the haves are those that spend more money on luxury items, which in turn creates more jobs for people. It also scares me b/c define rich. $250K a year is not RICH at all. In some places it’s enough to live comfortable, but not rich.
What I’m saying is that if they take more of my money, whether I get a break or not (and it is not 100%), it will limit the amount I can give on my own to allow them to give to who they see fit.
Yes, but subject to limits and conditions such that the majority of taxpayers (and possibly the majority of individual donations) aren’t deductible. Like the mortgage interest deduction, it really only applies to the wealthy.
Oops, that was directed to Steve…
No. Sorry, you’ve boarded the stupid train.
Allowing gay marriage to exist is not FORCING you to get married to someone of the same sex. It is not even forcing you to believe it is morally acceptable. It simply provides that freedom for people who choose to exercise it. You are still more than welcome to marry the opposite sex, and to believe that gay marriage is wrong. But as I said before, what you BELIEVE shouldn’t be written into LAW that others are forced to live with.
You do owe society. Whether you like to admit it or not, without society you would be living in a cave carrying a spear. There are some people in our society who are suffering, homeless, etc. Those people deserve to be treated like humans, and given the chance to survive. This is America, there is no excuse for people starving to death in the streets. IF the wealthy took up the moral obligation themselves to give to charitable organizations, donate their time, etc. to help those in need, we wouldn’t be forced to rely on social programs like welfare. The problem is, most people are selfish jerks and if we don’t force them to help via taxation, they wouldn’t help. Yes, some would, but many would not.
As far as the Guantanamo Bay prisoners, you do realize that the ones being released were never given a trial, nor convicted of a crime. They were being detained ILLEGALLY. Those with evidence against them will be tried and prosecuted accordingly. Those that cannot be convicted will be set free. That’s how the justice system in America works.
“We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights”
That doesn’t say most people, some people, American citizens, christians, it says ALL. There is no room for exception, none. Everyone deserves a fair trial, and if they can’t be convicted in a court of law then they are entitled to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness.
You cannot give one inch of freedom, even in the supposed name of ‘national security’, because the next step could be arresting YOU and detaining YOU without trial. They could just say they suspect you of terrorism, and off you go to prison with no rights, no trial, and no appeal. It’s completely unacceptable and it goes against everything this nation was founded upon.
Do you consider gay marriage to be a privilege or a right? There’s a definite difference in enforcement — privileges can (usually) be denied, but rights cannot. I think this is the ultimate plan of the hard-liners who’ve co-opted the gay marriage movement.
You’ll have to explain to me how the Declaration of Independence implies that foreign and stateless hostile actors must somehow be tried under the American judicial system.
Most people talk about hetero marriage as a right. If that’s correct, then gay “marriage” (I’d prefer civil partnership or similar) must be too.
I don’t consider your personal interpretation of what “most people talk about”, which is itself not the same thing as the law, to be a factual starting point, so no, it “must be” nothing.
The question was with Steve’s original statement: “Allowing gay marriage to exist is not FORCING you to get married to someone of the same sex.” If gay marriage is implemented as a right, is this necessarily true?
Yes, Steve’s statement is true. You have the right to apply for a driver’s licence, but no-one is actually forcing you to do so if you really don’t need or want one (for example, you live. work and shop in a 2 block radius).
Or are you suggesting that single people like me should be forcably married to someone?
Um, no — a drivers license is most definitely a privilege. They can’t deny me one for being in a protected class, but they can for all sorts of other reasons, from my record to my eyesight.
I didn’t quote enough — my mistake. If it’s a right, they’re not forcing me to use it, but they are forcing me to accept it. If I’m a member of a religion that doesn’t perform gay marriages, does that mean I’m forced to perform them, or get shut down?
@ Dhoti: Not anymore than churches are forced now to perform marriages for anyone they disapprove of. In other words, it’s a nonissue.
Now, possibly a public, for-profit wedding chapel might have an issue, but that’s another whole kettle of fish.
I was under the impression that a church couldn’t deny, say, an interracial marriage without being able to prove that it wasn’t because of race, and maybe not even then. Am I just wrong about that, or is there a difference when there’s a protected class in play?
If you will pardon the wall-of-text, this is what the United States Supreme Court says on marriage as a right:
“The leading decision of this Court on the right to marry is Loving v. Virginia, 388 U.S. 1, 87 S.Ct. 1817, 18 L.Ed.2d 1010 (1967). In that case, an interracial couple who had been convicted of violating Virginia’s miscegenation laws challenged the statutory scheme on both equal protection and due process grounds. The Court’s opinion could have rested solely on the ground that the statutes discriminated on the basis of race in violation of the Equal Protection Clause. Id., at 11-12, 87 S.Ct., at 1823-1824. But the Court went on to hold that the laws arbitrarily deprived the couple of a fundamental liberty protected by the Due Process Clause, the freedom to marry. The Court’s language on the latter point bears repeating:
“The freedom to marry has long been recognized as one of the vital personal rights essential to the orderly pursuit of happiness by free men.
“Marriage is one of the ‘basic civil rights of man,’ fundamental to our very existence and survival.” Id., at 12, 87 S.Ct., at 1824, quoting Skinner v. Oklahoma ex rel. Williamson, 316 U.S. 535, 541, 62 S.Ct. 1110, 1113, 86 L.Ed. 1655 (1942).
Although Loving arose in the context of racial discrimination, prior and subsequent decisions of this Court confirm that the right to marry is of fundamental importance for all individuals. Long ago, in Maynard v. Hill, 125 U.S. 190, 8 S.Ct. 723, 31 L.Ed. 654 (1888), the Court characterized marriage as “the most important relation in life,” id., at 205, 8 S.Ct., at 726, and as “the foundation of the family and of society, without which there would be neither civilization nor progress,” id., at 211, 8 S.Ct., at 729. InMeyer v. Nebraska, 262 U.S. 390, 43 S.Ct. 625, 67 L.Ed. 1042 (1923), the Court recognized that the right “to marry, establish a home and bring up children” is a central part of the liberty protected by the Due Process Clause, id., at 399, 43 S.Ct., at 626, and in Skinner v. Oklahoma ex rel. Williamson, supra, 316 U.S. 535, 62 S.Ct. 1110, 86 L.Ed. 1655 (1942), marriage was described as “fundamental to the very existence and survival of the race,” 316 U.S., at 541, 62 S.Ct., at 1113.”
Zablocki v. Redhail, 434 U.S. 374, 383-384, 98 S.Ct. 673, 679 – 680 (U.S.,1978).
Thanks!
So, to translate for the legalese impaired, when they describe it as a “vital personal [right]” and a “basic civil [right] of man”, that means they also consider it one of those legal rights upon which the state may generally not infringe, correct?
Means that any state regulation that “significantly interfere[s] with decisions to enter into the marital relationship” is subject to strict scrutiny, which means it would be unconstitutional “unless it is supported by sufficiently important state interests and is closely tailored to effectuate only those interests.”
In other words, yes, what you said.
Okay, so given that, does that mean that, where it’s currently legal, gay marriage is also a right? And what does that mean for religious groups that won’t perform gay marriages, or individuals that won’t perform services for gay weddings on some grounds?
I would say that’s an issue that’s still legally murky. However, what the California Supreme Court said in upholding Prop 8 was basically “Same-sex couples have a basic right to the same rights to form family units with the same rights and privileges as mixed-sex couples, but if the voters don’t approve calling it marriage, call it something else…” Which seems a reasonable enough compromise to me provided it’s actually the same.
Churches (and officiants) can agree to or refuse to perform marriages for whatever reason they like, whether it would be considered discriminatory in the public sector or not. That whole “religious freedom” thing we have, you know. Heck, you can go to a church your whole life and ask the preacher to marry you and if he wants to say “No…I just think you two are totally wrong for each other, I won’t do it!” that’s fine. Same goes for refusing to perform marriages for, say, couples of two different religions or races, or just refusing to marry non-members.
Dhoti – Freedom of religion is covered under the first amendment. If any particular religious group does not want to perform gay marriage, they cannot force them to do so. It would be up to each individual church to decide for themselves. It’s a non-issue.
Hmm, I didn’t realize they had that much choice, diss. I guess I was stuck back on Reynolds vs. United States…which, as I read a bit more, is somewhat out of date…
Steve — I guess even a stopped clock is right twice a day…
The Steve: And freeomd to bear arms is in the 2nd, but it doesn’t stop law makers from making laws to prevent this. The DC gun ban wasn’t barely overturned, and the new laws to “meet” the requirements are more oppresive and make trying to own a gun harder. I don’t buy, it’s in the 1st Amendment, it won’t get trashed. How about Obama purchasing the banks and GM, seems kinda away from the 10th Amendment, but hey you know!!!!
The Steve: I disagree. The public said they believe that Marriage is between a Man and a Woman. But making the law change and defining Marriage as something else is pushing your “Moral” idea of Marriage onto someone. Remember Marriage has quite a bit of religious conotation to it. Also the law was looking to force churches into having to do marriages for gay couples. If you had said Civil Union (which has yet to be defined really) would have the same legal ramifications as marriage, then there would be less of a moral pushing. But to redefine marriage is pushing morals onto people.
I give to society already with both my job and my 45% in taxes (federal, state, social security, medicare, property taxes) haven’t even gotten into sales taxes. I give my donation to the church. So please don’t say I boarded the stupid train or preach to me about my debts to society. The rich have NO MORAL obligation to support the poor. Once again you’re pushing your morals unto the rich. You just admitted you were psuhing your morals on the rich “forcing them to help via taxation”. What about the moral, “I worked for it, it’s mine.”
I do realize that ones being released were caught in a warzone, in civilian clothing, without a uniform. I do know that these idividuals do no fall into the Geneva convention. I do know these individuals have expressed interests in killing Americans. I do know that these individuals, if tired in our system, will all be set free due to liberal lawyers who will claim that any evidence against them was retained via torture, this individuals did not recieve their miranda rights at the time of incarceration, and that these idividuals had their right to a “speedy” trial infringed. You can’t change the rules in the middle of the game. You can’t start holding TERRORISTS (sorry for using individuals fell into the liberal trap there) with the notion that they will not be given an American trial, set to American standards, and then what 6 or 7 years later decide to try them? My morals are not necesarily worldy morals. If these individauls don’t want to follow the rules or war, then so be it, LET THEM FRY! That’s my moral, different from yours, but your pushing yours onto me.
According to your last paragraph, what about giving up yards of freedom for “economic stability”? You seem ok with that. I’m willing to give an inch of freedom for security. I don’t plan on calling outside the country to suspected terrorists. These people were not caught in America, these are not American citizens, so I’m sorry our constitution doesn’t abide by them. Your political ideals work wonders in a controlled environment, and work wonders in an ideal world, but when you’re fighting maniacs it just won’t work, and will cost more civilian lives (not just American).
We’re of completely different opinions and we don’t agree on anything. You won’t change, and I won’t change. This is a waste of time, but you’re uninformed.
Several of the detainees in Gitmo were NOT captured in a war zone, and were NOT enemy combatants, they were in the UK and they were wrongly imprisoned by us for whatever reason we made up. Several other detainees were Uyghur, not combatants, but we won’t send them back to China because we think the Chinese will kill them.
“I worked for it, it’s mine.” – So the greatest nation on earth leaves the poor to die in the streets. You have every right to be a greedy prick, but that doesn’t mean I have to agree with you. In fact, if you claim to be a Christian then I’m completely appalled. If you’re not, then your opinion is valid, but I don’t agree.
No churches could be FORCED to perform same sex marriages. That’s ridiculous propaganda and nothing more, they are protected under the first amendment. Your Civil Union idea is equally stupid. You’re falling right back to the Equal but Separate crap that occurred during the civil rights movement with segregation. Seperate but Equal is NOT EQUAL. Should we have gay water fountains, gay schools, and gay seats on the bus too? Then why would we have a “Civil Union” and “Marriage”? If it’s the same thing, call it the same thing.
You seem to be hung up on an 18th century, state-vs-state view of warfare — it’s hardly fair to call ILPB uninformed for not having missed the last couple of centuries, yes?
Equating gay marriage with black civil rights is absolutely ridiculous.
Thinking that that’s ridiculous is ridiculous.
Explain.
Why is it ridiculous? Gays are being deprived of their rights just as blacks were being deprived of theirs. Sure, it’s a much narrower field of oppression being that we don’t have gay and straight water fountains and gays don’t have to sit at the back of the bus, but it’s still discrimination.
Damn those people for wanting equal rights in a the land of the free. DAMN THEM!!! (Vote Yes on Civil Unions)
Yeah, who do they think they are? They act like they’re Americans or something. WTF?
Actually, my opinion is that Civil Unions should be what the state regulates (whether the partners are the same or opposite sexes) and Marriage should be left to the churches.
As far as I’m concerned the state should stop recognising heterosexual marriages and it would solve the problem completely. If marriage really is a religious thing, then go get married in your church and if that church considers you married that should be good enough for you. Then everyone, same sex and opposite sex, can apply for a certificate of partnership from the state and get the benefits marriage brings. Take the state out of “marriage” altogether, then it doesn’t have the problem of having to decide which “marriages” to recognise along with some whiney little bitches going “But we don’t want you to recognise THAT marriage!!! My magic sky man wouldn’t like it”
Ceefax: See you were doing ok until you went to the last sentence. You can make a point with condescending sarcasm to a group. It’s pretty, well petty. However sarcasm that makes fun of everyone undiscriminantly is gladly accepted. One exception sarcasm and ridicule against Trolls is allowed.
-Giggles at Ceefax’s jokes and feels horrid-
And PB- you’ve spoken to the PUBLIC? ALL of us? and you took PERCENTAGES? Impressive, considering there’s 300+ million people in the US.
Tyler: I’ve spoken to the entire world. I was the string puller behind Cheney who pulled Bush’s strings. The country’s problems are all my fault, which is why I hate Obama so much!!! And where did me speaking to the public come from? I’m so lost… **Checks map** Nope not in KAnsas anymore ToTo….
I whole heartly agree with that. Civil Unions for everyone. My religion is against homosexual marriages, however not everyone shares my religious beliefs so they should not be subjugated to the same religious laws.
So civil unions to any consenting adults (regardless of gender(s)) and leave marriages in the context of religions that support them.
Gay Americans should be treated no differently than straight Americans.
Why murderers and rapists can get married but gay Americans can’t is totally beyond me.
I am infromed. But at least you didn’t say I was stupid. I’m not informed with your propagand, I’m informed with mine… so there :-p
Gitmo gitmo gitmo….. I say we take all the troops away and accidenly leave the gates open, let Cuba deal with them.
Hey I was talking morals here. Your morals can differ from mine, but you forcing me to give money to the poor is you pushing your morals on me. As I said earlier I give to charity, but DON’T force me to. And by not giving 35% of my income to the poor how is that being a greedy prick. I prefer to spend my money on a new car, redoing my house, gorceries, going out to eat (notice how all these things creat jobs for Americans and therefore I’m helong society by spending money). And you proved my point again, you don’t have to agree with me, but don’t force your wants desires and “Morals” on me, just like you don’t want me to do to you. I’m a Christian and I give my Charity to the church. I’ve also donated thousands of dollars worth of clothes, food, and material to the Good Will and/or Salvation Army (and don’t do the tax credit thing since I do it at drop boxes and don’t get reciepts). So there.
It’s not propaganda. If one were to add the laws up, it could be illegal for a church to deny services to someone based on race, gender, and sexual preference. And my Civil Union ideal is not CRAP. Biggest difference between that and “Separate but Equal”, is that separate but equal had ZERO religious reference to it. See the fact that you want and have a need to call it a Marriage, worries me that you’re not wanting it for freedom, but to rub the religious rights face in it. If the Civil Union has = benefits under the law that Marriage does, but does not contain the relgious aspects (once again protect the 1st Amendment and the fact you want to call it marriage makes my propagand more realistic), how is that separate but equal.
PS: You don’t see gay people pushing for Baptisms, or communion (all religious sacraments), so why should marriage (religious sacrament) be different. As I said before I believe in Gay MArriage (wish it was Civil Unions), but don’t like the hoity toity attitude to have to call it a marriage just to mess with religious people.
I would agree with you about baptism and communion if the state stopped recognizing marriage.
The state doesn’t recognize baptism or communion, they’re not asking for a gay religion, they’re asking to be married in the eyes of the state, not in the eyes of anyone’s God.
The Steve: But Marriage has such a religious overtone to it. I’m all for calling them Civil Unions with the same lawful benifits as marriage (as defined today). Or as suggested call all state “marriages” Civil Unions, and then the church call them Marriages. BAM!! crisis solved. But to have to call them MArriages to me seems as if people are trying to force things and belittle religion.
Also, I’d interject here that there’s a difference between “separate but equal” as practiced pre-integration and what we are talking about here, which really comes down to an issue of semantics as long as the rights provided to ALL couples are the same.
Marriage isn’t religious, people are religious. Athiests get married all the time.
Legalizing same-sex marriage is not pushing morality on anyone. Don’t want a same-sex marriage? Don’t get one. You’re completely free to continue demonizing lesbians and gay men all you like. This garbage about requiring churches to perform same-sex marriages is just that — garbage. No judge in the United States would even consider a petition to order a church to perform any marriage that violates the church’s principles. That’s the whole point of the guarantee of religious freedom in the First Amendment.
Sort of like no judge would allow Gun Bans to be upheld. Sort of like no judge would allow the federal govenrment to force the state to do things.
And yes it is. Just b/c you think your position is correct doesn’t mean that you’re not pushing that position onto someone. By redefining “Marriage” as between two humans, vice a man and a woman, you’re forcing your moral definition of definition on someone.
My point which was entirely missed on most of the liberals argueing here is this: No matter WHAT your moral stance is, chances are someone shares a different moral stance than you. So if your moral stance is enacted into law, then your morals are being forced unto someone who does not agree. Both Liberals and Conservatives do it. It’s a catch 22, I’m just tired of hearing some liberals bitch and moan about how the are better b/c they do not push their morals onto anyone like the “evil” Christian Right does.
Sort of like the fact that guns have never been banned here.
Anyway, blargh, I’ll talk to you later ILPB. All I’ve seen today are idiots bashing me, and I don’t feel like putting up with that right now.
Who was bashing you? Please don’t say me. We’re having an intellectual conversation. DC Gun Ban. Had to go all the way to the Federal Supreme court to be overturned. Chicago currently has a Gun Ban. San Francisco is voting on a Gun Ban soon. You see where this is going. Just b/c it’s an Amendment doesn’t mean that it’s followed appropriately.
Also Assault Rifle bans that finally were lifted, but Obama is quickly working to put back into place.
Personal guns were banned in the District of Columbia under a local law until that law was overturned as unconstitutional by the Supreme Court in District of Columbia v. Heller, 128 S.Ct. 2783 (U.S.,2008). I think that’s what is being referred to here, as the ban had been upheld by the district court, although the appeals court reversed (and DC appealed to the Supreme Court).
Interesting.
And not you, PB, some people on the whole “VG is a troll” bit.
VD leads to Trolls, what?!?!
Diss, also referred to Chicago’s gun ban. The fact that San Fran wants to ban guns, and the Assault Gun ban going back into effect when Obama signs it. So yeah I believe I have some concern under this Administartion that they could infringe onf the 1st Amendment if it is deemed Gay Marriage, vice Civil Union.
Gitmo prisoners are people too.
It’s not a matter of winning on a Christian platform…it’s winning on a platform that is actually good for America…not just those in office. We don’t want to force anyone to pray to God, but we want the freedom for anyone to pray when and where they want. This nation was founded on Biblical principles and ideas, and that should not be thrown out the window because one group or another doesn’t agree with it. We (as Christians) are not trying to *force* anyone to be Christian…but athiests, and others, need to stop trying to force us to hide our Christianitits. Everyone is all wrapped up in “don’t offend anyone!” unless you might be offending a Christian. Enough of the thought police! We can all think and act for ourselves, within the confines of the law. Does it really offend little Billy if little Kari two seats down in the lunch room prays silently before she eats?
Anyone would think you were being fed to the lions. Can the victim complex, the US was founded on strong secular principles and that is being rightly upheld. If you want to live in a theocracy there are lots to chose from.
What of the actions that sopranomom posted goes against those same strong secular principles? Or, more to the point, replace “Christian” with “Muslim” — does your interpretation change?
No, not at all. Schools should be secular places and that counts for Muslims, Christians and everyone else. Teachers should not be able to lead students in praying to that teacher’s particular God, no matter which of the many gods it is.
I guess I didn’t see sopranomom list that one.
Also, there is no ban on prayer in public schools. There’s a ban on led prayer in public schools. If little Johnny is really praying silently, how will anyone know he’s doing it, unless he’s trying to make a big deal of it and being deliberately disruptive? I notice you onyl talk about Christian prayer, should muslims, Buddhists and Satanists also be allowed to pray overtly on school property? You go to school to learn. Do your praying in church.
We’d better kick the girls out — school is for learning, not for menstruating. And the black kids, too — be diverse on your own time. The Jewish, Muslim, and vegetarian kids — pork chops is the cheapest meal available today, and you’re here to learn, not to be a gourmand, so tough cookies.
What on earth are you on about? Has your brain finally broken? There’s no ban on praying in school anyway, unless you actively want to hijack schools to become places of indoctrination for Christianity or Islam there is no reason to have any kind of problem.
Think a little more about what you said.
“You go to school to learn. Do your praying in church.”
Sounds like hijacking to me. Or does that count because it’s you doing the hijacking?
The more I read that metaphor, the more ridiculous it becomes. No-one’s talking about not letting Christians into school are they? Maybe if you altered it to say “We’d better stop girls changing their tampons in the lunch hall” it might work as a metaphor, but that doesn’t back your point very well does it? Girls are allowed in school. Girls are allowed to menstruate and change tampons in school. But wait, they’re not allowed to hold organised tampon changing sessions in public on school time? oh noes, that means girls are being outlawed, just like those poor persecuted christians! Muslims and Jews are allowed to pray just as much as Christians are anyway. You’ve really not thought this through before posting, have you?
See above — you’re just digging yourself in deeper.
Digging deeper into what? You’ve come up with a mangled metaphor that doesn’t make any sense, and you’re comparing people, just BEING something (female, black, muslims) with people DOING something (Leading children in prayer in schools) If the topic was if Christians should be allowed in schools in the first place then it might be valid.
Ah, I see — you’re going after prayer in schools, but when challenged, you say you’re just going after leading prayer in schools. Make up your mind.
“You go to school to learn. Do your praying in church.”
is not the same as
“Teachers should not be able to lead students in praying to that teacher’s particular God”,
understand?
Being diverse and having a period isn’t the same thing as being *deliberately* disruptive, which you can help or stop voluntarily, Dhoti. :/
I’m going after Ceefax’s “You go to school to learn. Do your praying in church.” line, which is much more broadly applicable.
But what counts as being deliberately disruptive? Wearing a a cross? Wearing a turban? Wearing a hijab? Praying silently five times a day? Facing Mecca and praying five times a day? It’s a slippery slope…
“Ah, I see — you’re going after prayer in schools, but when challenged, you say you’re just going after leading prayer in schools. Make up your mind.”
PRAYING. IN. SCHOOLS. IS. NOT. BANNED.
If you’re praying silently and not leading others how would anyone know anyway? Stop going out of your way to be offended by things! Honestly, there is no more politically correct group in the US than Christian Republicans.
“You go to school to learn. Do your praying in church.”
Did you say this? Yes or no?
Fu(king idiot.
Give up, Ceefax. Dhoti wallows in being deliberately obtuse. No matter what you say, he will pretend you’re saying something else, and that something else he’s imagining is offense to him. Let it roll off, brother.
Put up or shut up, Ivan.
Go back and show me how “You go to school to learn. Do your praying in church.” doesn’t mean what it says.
Can you do that, big guy?
I can, Dhoti! Look! -Time warps and swallows entire nest-
*crickets*
No surprise there, Ivan. If I didn’t know better, I’d say you were a sock for mothergoose — you both lie the same way.
I don’t respond to trollish behavior Dhoti. So blow me.
Ivan, the options were:
a) put up
b) shut up
Since you’re obviously unable to do a), how about you put on your big boy pants and do b) instead? Or instead would you rather attack people than prove your point? Is that too much to ask from you?
*still crickets*
Ivan, it’s good to know that you’re too good to support what you say. It’ll definitely save me some time in the future.
This is quite the single most stupid response I have ever seen on the net that didn’t come from an active illiterate.
I would like to clarify that I was referring to Dhoti’s suggestion that women, blacks and vegetarians best take their menstruating, diversifying and tofu snarfing elsewhere.
Was it the sarcasm that gave you trouble, or was the thread too long for you to keep up with?
You should be able to pray outloud if you wish. No one is saying to scream it out from the mountaintops. You should not be ashamed to pray to God, or Allah, or Buddah or any other god that might be out there. There is still freedom of sheech in this country but I guess if you’re in a building that gets government money that freedom stops. Soon no one will be able to pray at their work because Obama will be sure to bail it out so the government can take control of it.
So… yeah.
Okay.
Please remove tinfoil bat from your ass, unfold it and place it on your head, so it correctly identifies you.
(Small correction- you don’t pray to Buddah, you try and follow his example.)
Anyway, sure, pray out loud if you like, but do it during lunch, not in class.
Yes, I did. And you’ve not managed to come up with any answer to it, which is why you’re resorting to insults.
Why do you HAVE to make it so other people hear your praying? Is God Hard of hearing?
Yeah, technically speaking I would think praying out loud during class would be disruptive being that my school didn’t allow talking during class.
Matthew 6:6 – But thou, when thou prayest, enter into thy closet, and when thou hast shut thy door, pray to thy Father which is in secret; and thy Father which seeth in secret shall reward thee openly.
I know it’s a typo, sopranomom….but it still cracked me up. Topless prayer?
Sounds like a virus doesn’t it?
No, it’s funny because it has the word tits in it.
Tyler: Just when I don’t think you can get anymore 12 boy humorish… you totally do….. ***shakes head and chcukles***
Hey, man, diss is the first one who noticed it. Don’t blame Tyler for seeing the obvious.
Does that mena Diss will show us her Christian tits?
She already did on another thread. You gotta keep up!
Oh those were her Christian tits, I thought they were her plane ol boobies. You’re right I do need to keep up.
And they were SPECTACULAR!
Oh good. I’m not the only one who noticed that.
C’mon ladies, show us your Christian tits!
Not on Christian values… And it doesn’t offend little Billy. There is no law against praying in school. However, I would take issue if there was a required prayer time in school.
The country was founded on secular values, that’s why the separation of church and state exists, and it’s clearly stated in our rights that we can practice whatever religion we want to. Just because the values match Christianity, doesn’t mean they’re Christian. They could very well be the founders’ humanitarian side, not their Christian beliefs.
I’m a Christian and I have yet to receive a letter, e-mail, or phone call from the government telling me where and when I’m allowed to pray. Did I miss the memo?
If little Kari prays silently, how would anyone know she’s praying?
If little Billy happens to be Islamic and he takes out his prayer rug, kneels, and prays to Allah, would you still feel the same about prayer belonging in school?
Keeping ALL religious displays out of school makes it EQUAL and FAIR for everyone.
Stop acting like Christians are being oppressed, because we’re not.
Yep, it’s totally fair, especially to those religions and traditions with commandments that can’t be hidden. Leave your hijab and yarmulke at the door — how could that possibly be unfair to anyone?
Not only that, we were allowed to pray in school (graduated 1999). We even went outside and prayed around the flag one day per year. The only rule was that no teachers or members of the school administration could organize it (or participate if I recall correctly). It had to be student organized.
The Steve: Actually yes I did get the memo. A while back a memo went out to federal employees (I was working in a federal building) that said not to dispaly religious symbols within your cubicle. Also no holiday decorations were allowed at Christmas. So yeah the federal goernment did send me a memo telling me I’m not allowed to be openly religious.
Actually what makes it fair and equal is shoiwng ALL religious symbols. This country was founded on diversity and freedoms. Instead of dividing such things (as extemists and the ACLU loves to do) let’s embrace them and learn from them. I would have loved to learn more about Yom Kippur in school (though it was nice to have off). Or maybe if I learned more about Quanza I’d understand it, vice ridiculing it all the time. Better yet, let’s teach our childrne about Islam, vice what they learn in the news or on TV, Islam = terrorists = blow you up. Simply put, not showing holiday or religious decorations in school is promoting athieism, which is it’s own form of religion.
Isn’t it interesting that the only officially permitted religious display just happens to be easily confused with atheism and agnosticism?
People forget it’s Freedom OF Religion not Freedom FROM Religion. I’m not offended by any religious symbol, b/c I respect the first amendment.
It is possible to follow a religion or have religious beliefs and not hang tons of religious icons around the house. I think that students should be free and encouraged to learn about all types of religion, whether it’s having an equal amount of books in the library or having optional classes open. I don’t think not having religious icons around promotes atheism. That’s like saying that the government favors asexuals because having sex in public isn’t legal. If anything, it promotes open thought. A pro-atheist or pro-agnostic symbol would be a Richard Dawkins book, for God’s sake (teehee).
To the book *touche*
However I disagree. I believe in Social Studies class would be a great place to teach children about religions. I think Holidays would be a great time as well. I grew up in a pretty liberal area of Connecticut but we managed to have plenty of decorations for pretty much all the Holidays (vice Quanza), and would take that time to discuss them. I think if it were up to the ACLU there would be no religion at all. I feel this country is trying to do Freedom FROM Religion. Why else would they not allow children to decorate their desks, or employees to decorate their cubicles at work?
PB, I’ve studied religion in high school social studies. Mostly the Great Schism, Roman Catholic church, etc., but still religion, along with buddhism, judaism, christianity, blargh blargh blargh etc etc. in middle school.
But you don’t fear religion as some on this site do. I mean some people see someone wearing a crucifex and act like Vampires!!
I don’t think a public school should have (a lot of) religion in their social studies classes, at least not until high school. It’s much better to offer culture clubs after school because it wouldn’t allow for claims of bias and state-n-religion arguments. My personal beliefs and bias are going to show up now as I really dislike most organized religion and wouldn’t enjoy learning a lot about it with my very religious (and stupid, but DISCLAIMER I’m not saying religion is stupid) classmates, but I think that teaching kids about other religions and cultures is important as long as everything is taught fairly and whatnot.
Matthew 6:6 – But thou, when thou prayest, enter into thy closet, and when thou hast shut thy door, pray to thy Father which is in secret; and thy Father which seeth in secret shall reward thee openly.
Liberals dont like her politics. If she had the power to unite the conservatives, she wouldn’t have cost John McCain the Presidency.
But McCain is nto a conservative…that’s where that fell to pieces. She wasn’t willing to bend to fit the mold they wanted her to be in.
The liberals like her because she’s destroying any chance the GOP has of being an effective opposition. Which is the same reason that Conservatives have turned on her and are savaging her in a far more vicious way than the liberals.
It’s not the conservatives that have turned on her. They (we) have turned TO her. Its the republicans, et al, that are turning on her. The republicans are no longer truly conservatives any more than the liberals are. Teh reps are becomming more and more liberal as each year passes! That’s why McCain didn’t win…he brought nothing to the table that Obama didn’t already bring with him.
McCain didn’t win because he chose Palin and she brought with her the very ugly face of the Republican Party that America is sick to death of, the ones that were screaming for Obama to be killed and calling him an Arab at events.
**pushes the heavy smoke out of the way** What you been smoking boy?
You do know that there is no recorded evidence to back up those claims of psychos screaming about killing Obama, right? It was an unfounded account by a single so-called journalist at one event. And I don’t know if you are aware, but McCain’s approval ratings among Republicans and conservatives SKYROCKETED after Palin came onto the scene. Before they were having serious issues with voting for him, because he never really did follow the party line.
“You do know that there is no recorded evidence to back up those claims of psychos screaming about killing Obama, right? ”
Click my name for recorded evidence.
Sorry, wrong link – tell me you can’t hear KILL HIM in this video.
Claimed money I wasn’t entitled to, but gave it back isn’t at least morally corrupt (even if not actively criminal)?
Wait wha? When did this happen? When was she charged with it? (I won’t even get into the But Obama… But Pelosi…. But Reid…. things that are overlooked by people as being OUTRIGHT corrupt legally AND morally)…..
It’s well documented that she has made expenses claims relating to her time as Governer which were found to be improper, and repaid the funds received. To the point where I won’t Google it, because I’d get so many hits as to not be meaningful.
Sorry, but making an expenses claim without first checking that you are entitled to recompense of the sum claimed is at least incompetent and/or immoral, regardless of whether there is a criminal case to answer or not. If I’d done it, I’d be looking for a new job, not told “give us the money back and we’ll treat the case as closed”.
I’m pretty sure if the same kind of scrutiny was paid to almost all politicians we would find things similar things.
Paws: I just looked into the so called corruption you spoke of. These are things any Governor does. She’s not giving money back, but paying taxes on it. Also her charging the per diem rate and living at home was cheaper for tax payers than getting a housing allowance and having all groceries paid for, for her to stay in Juneau. So her actually helping out her tax payers, you’re calling her corrupt? Her bringing her family (which I believe President Obama does on a regualr basis) she’s corrupt. Man-o-man…. this is classic.
Ok, I’ll bite. Name another state Governer who claimed travel expenses for their children and then repaid it. Remember that you just said that this was “something that any Governer does”.
Well, let me just jump in here and say that they don’t put the level of scrutiny on many other politicians that they do on her. So who knows what might be going on out there. The age of true investigative reporting is out the door. There must be a huge payoff for any dirt on Palin.
I’m not claiming that others (both sides) aren’t “at it” too. Just challenging ILPB to prove his claim that they are.
Well, what I am saying is that it may be difficult to prove it because of the lack of interest in the media, etc. Just my 2 cents.
Dang it!! I responded and had a nice long post, but alas being a true American I’m too lazy to redo it. Bottom line. Khaine didn’t take his children, but his security detail with him on DNC business, but had the state pay. Not until the Repubs yelled and screamed (6 months) did he offer to have the DNC reimburse the state.
Didn’t we already cover this yesterday? Do you not remember, do you need further explanation, or do you simply prefer your version to the truth?
“I don’t understand why the liberals don’t like her much. The media has curcified her and her family more so than any other female politician.”
First of all, don’t generalize liberals like that. And to the second part, the media has the right by the constitution to investigate and report what they believe is newsworthy to keep our government, but current and prospective, in check of their actions. Without the media, we wouldn’t even know what Palin was like. Unfortunately, they brought out a so many skeletons in her closet you can make a graveyard out of them.
” The problem with the liberal agenda, it’s berate a candidate to the point where you try and make it embarrassing to support them. Vice actually attacking the policies, it’s attack the person. (Conservative agenda does it to a point, but we don’t have seem to get it right).”
Um, you contradicted yourself there. So, its bad if the liberals call conservatives out on questionable behaviors to the point of embarrassment, but it would be okay if the conservatives did it to liberals successfully? Ad hominem arguments are always bound to come up in political arguments (its basically required), but don’t be hypocritical.
Besides, as for the conservatives bashing liberals, two words: FOX News.
Smartz: Umm you’re right, the media has the right to investigate whomever they want, but where were they in finding Mr. Obama’s skeletons? If you can sit there and honestly say that the media hasn’t attacked Palin more than any candidate, let alone female candidate then I can not hold a intelligent conversation with you b/c oyu’ve drank WAY too much Kool Aid.
I didn’t contradict myself. The liberal media and liberal agenda does not attack a person’s policies they attack the person. B/c a person is Pro-Life, they are anti women’s rights. B/C a person is Pro-Religion, they are a religious wing nut who’ll push their morals on you and outlaw homosexuality and put crosses in every window.
I never said it was ok for conservatives to do it. I hate attacking a person personally.
And WOW!!! We get one news station as opposed to CNN, MSNBC, ABC Nightly News, CBS Nightly News, NBC Nightly News, 60 Minutes……..
Cmon, PB, let’s not get into this discussion again.
Smartz brought it up.
Plus Smartz hit me back first!!!!!
It was her former brother in law, and the man admitted to using a taser on his own son. A police issued taser. I wouldn’t want someone like that “protecting” my city, either.
And Palin is not the first person to have clothing purchased for her by a campaign association. Do you really think Michelle O. bought all those designer duds herself?
Stepson, wasn’t it?
True. Still… it doesn’t seem to be the sort of thing a police officer should be doing, does it? I think that if that were happening in ANY town, most citizens would be clamoring for that officer to be punished. I’m not saying that Palin didn’t use her position in possibly questionable ways to get this man in trouble, but I am saying that this wasn’t simply an issue of a woman helping her buddy get revenge on some man. This was a serious deal.
Nor does it seem like the sort of thing any dad (or step-dad) should be doing! (Ok, unless your kid is bigger than you, out of their mind on pcp or something, and attacking you…the exception that proves the rule).
I’m not disagreeing with you at all; if anything the fact that it was a stepson makes it worse, although it’s bad enough either way.
I agree, she’s never been convicted of anything. So calling her corrupt is like calling Michael Jackson a pediphile or OJ Simpson a murderer.
BTW, Lizzy Borden was acquittal too.
So, if the result of any trial or investigation doesn’t comport with your opinion, it’s wrong and not to be believed? Mistakes have been made in investigations AND trials, but when you look at how many accusations have been made against Gov. Palin, and the fact that NONE that have been resolved have found fault, doesn’t that mean anything to you? Somehow I doubt it. After all, why abandon opinion in the face of evidence to the contrary.
The sky is green.
Tornado watch?
You don’t see repaying money that you claimed as expenses as an admission that you were at least morally, if not legally, wrong to have claimed it?
Did you ever stop to think maybe she thought those expenses were allowable, and when the claims were denied she then paid said expenses?
I’ve had a gas mileage claim denied by my work, I was traveling for work, but because I left from home they said they couldn’t pay it due to some technicality. So does that make me corrupt, or is it possible that I just didn’t know the intricacies of the rule?
Different argument, unless you’re actually paid to understand (I guess Federal tax law).
If we were talking about the head of the travel committee, you might have an argument. Or do you truly believe that not only is it even feasible, but a logical use of time, for every elected official to become an expert on every section of state law?
Ever hear of delegation?
OMG, did we just agree on something?!?
*waits for universe to collapse*
I used to be in the army. If you traveled for them, you kept all of your receipts and such. When you got back you write up the proper form claiming everything and present the receipts. It was then their job to decide on and authorize proper repayment for debt you have incurred. If they pay you, and then come back and say, “We wrongly repaid you for this item on our list and now you have to pay us back,” then the mistake was theirs for authorizing the repayment on something that should not have been authorized. You are only at fault if you do NOT pay the money back when they request it.
I don’t think she’s really corrupt, but I am a little glad to see her go, though I’m sure this won’t knock down the media attention any (which, despite her insistance, I think she totally basks in).
She’s kind of the Paris Hilton of politics… a media-loving “pretty face” (depending on opinion) with no outstanding talents to speak of, yet somehow the center of attention just about everywhere she goes.
…”a media-loving “pretty face” (depending on opinion) with no outstanding talents to speak of, yet somehow the center of attention just about everywhere she goes.”
Kinda like what Hillary Clinton was calling President Obama during the primary season…
She just has more experience than Obama does.
Oh SNAP!! You did not go there!!!
Well yes. if by “pretty face” you mean “unattractive attention hoar”.
She has a light coating of frost?
Well, it does get cold up there, but I’d think this time of year she’d be all thawed out.
She’s not going anywhere – if anything, we’ll see more of her now that she’s free to do public speaking.
I hear the 10 p.m. slot is opening up at FoxNews…..
“glad to see her go”???? Are you an Alaskan? If not, you have no reason to be glad to see her go – she’s not leaving any political office that has anything to do with you.
Um, yea, I am. Lower the blood pressure, dude.
Leaving her post before completing her designated term (with an explanation that amounts to “”cause I don’t feel like it”) is just one more piece of information to be used in creating a sketch of her character. (Imagine making the same announcement at your place of employment 5 hours into an 8-hour shift – think you’d be lauded and welcomed back?)
I agree with Todd Purdum’s comment that a person with an identical c.v. who looked like Susan Boyle would never have been given a second thought (let alone a first chance to run of national office).
It’s yet another illustration that, for many people, style outweighs substance.
How can something like this possibly be news to you? The public pays more attention to good-looking people? SHOCKER!!!
And it’s not the same as leaving your 8-hour shift. She’s didn’t announce her resignation and leave office the same day, his is like her putting in a two-week notice, which, last time I checked. She’ll stick around until the transition is all cleared up and then retire to do something else. You know, like people with real jobs do in the real world.
People in the real world are hired, not elected. When you run for office you are aware of the term length and are agreeing to fulfill that obligation to the citizens who elect you.
I’m not sad to see her go, but if I was an Alaskan who voted for her I would feel slighted.
This is not news to me nor shocking. It is, however, disheartening that so many people not only paid attention to her, but elected her to a powerful position where many trust her to help protect their well-being.
When considering the “value” of an entertainer, it’s understandable for good looks to be heavily counted; for a politician, not so much.
As for the 8-hour shift analogy, you may be right. How about this: contracting to do a job that requires a 4-year commitment and leaving after 2-1/2 with the work not completed. Think you’d be considered an attractive candidate for the next position?
Years ago a man I admire greatly taught me a very useful adage: Behavior is believable.
You rack up half a million dollars in legal bills fighting lawsuits that end up being unfounded, all the while having your children dragged into jokes on the national scene, and then come back talking about character and substance. I’d get out of the spotlight for a while too…
She’s already a millionaire and will make millions more from her ghost-written book and $100,000 a pop speaking engagements. She’ll probably also end up on the board of a few rightwing corporations. She’s set for life, financially.The legal fees aren’t really an issue.
As for her kids. what did she think would happen? I don’t recall any rightwingers expressing sympathy during the period when fat, misogynistic, drug and sex-addicted pouftah Rush Limbaugh was relentlessly bashing Chelsea Clinton.
NP: Umm actually there were some people who did speak out against what Limbaugh said about Chelsea. Plus let’s look at the leader of the Democratic Party, President Obama. Isn’t he the one who said to leave families out of it? Do you think if some media figure or comedian were to assial or make fun of Obama’s daughters there would be NO repricsusion? No left-wing lynch mob ready to thorw the person to the wolves?
And the good lefties aren’t particularly fond of Palin’s kids being made fun of in the media either. And those of us who advocate saying anything about the kids at all do so because it says something about SARAH, not them. Quite frankly, it isn’t my business if Bristol has a baby or not. It just says something about Sarah’s abstinence only stance on sex ed, that’s all.
She does NOT have an abstinence only stance, she does not. Bristol was educated on the use of condoms.
Education FAIL!!!
Or possibly Condom FAIL!!! I have to admit I wouldn’t have much faith in Levi Johnston’s ability to correctly use one.
Well why not attack her through another means, and not through her kids. If anything you should be championing her for supporting her 18 year pregnant daughter. Some “religious wing nuts” would throw their daughter out or hide them away from the world. Instead she stood by her daughter and embraced it and supported her. Isn’t that a “progressive” thing to do?
Wow… you are just FULL of…..uh, sweetness and love, aren’t you?
We’ll see if she stays out of the spotlight.
If she chooses to put herself back in the public eye, then that excuse is out the window.
How about this scenario: Senator is voted by the people into office as a certain Party Member. Halfway through his tem he changes parties b/c he knows he can’t win the primary of his current party. This man is praised by his new parties leadership and the President as standing up for his convictions, and being tru to himself. How is that NOT showing sketchy character? How is that not abandoning the people who voted you in? How is that NOT doing something illegal by using funds from one party to get elected and then switching parties? I think that could be constituted FRAUD! However it’s applauded by those in power. Man I’m so worked up now and want to hurl insults, but I won’t be a Troll. But man the hypocrisy burns.
You’re referring to Arlen Specter… Well, he’s still a senator. Still representing the people of Pennsylvania, just as he has for decades. And I’m of the belief that he didn’t move left… the Republican Party moved right. The only reason he was even looking at having to have a primary opponent was because he and the Ladies from Maine dared split with the party to vote on the Stimulus. Scandalous! Specter made a calculated choice – either stay in the Republican party and let the far right push him out by voting for a Way Right candidate who would then lose the actual election, or swap parties, and beat that Way Right candidate himself. He couldn’t pull a Lieberman and run as an Independent, not allowed to in PA. Sure, it may seem “sketchy” or “dishonorable,” but it likely feels to him that he didn’t leave the party, he was being pushed out.
Compare that to our most recent Republican Sex Scandaleers… Men who tried to impeach a President over a blowjob but see no reason to resign when caught in their own extra-marital relationships. That’s the hypocrisy that burns.
Real: Don’t you think he should of waited until his term was up? To me he quit the Party that ELECTED HIM halfway through his job. What if Obama woke up one morning, saw the light, and said “You know what, I don’t want big government, I think that social programs should be left to charities as the constitution intends it. So I’m joining the Republican Party.” you don’t think the Democrats who voted for him wouldn’t feel well lack of a better term f%cked over?!?!
Won’t get into the Sex Scandals arguements b/c that’s off topic. We’re talking about how people are claiming Palin’s character is screwed up b/c she quit and didn’t finsih her term. I compared that to someone else who quit his party through one of his terms, but is touted as having Character. Please stay on topic.
And to reiterate…. Specter frauded the Republican party. He used their funds to get elected and for his own good (btw he’s like REALLY behind in the polls) he swtiched Parties, not for the good of the PAers. It doesn’t seem it IS sketchy and dishonorable. He owed the Republican voters who donated to his campaign to stay Republican until his term was over. Lieberman switched parties during the elction, when his term was over. He wasn’t a Senator who then went and switched parties.
Not everyone votes the party line. Some of us vote for the person whose judgment we trust. If that person, once in office, discovers that he can no longer remain in the party that helped finance his campaign because of philosophical difference, then you’re saying he has to remain with the party with which he no longer shares an ideology. Lieberman of Ct. lost the Democratic primary because the Democrats didn’t like his conservative views about the war in Iraq. He went on to run and win as an Independent because the people voted for the man, not the party.
Jeffers of Vt. was a centrist Republican but quit the Republican party when it shifted further toward the right and he found himself disagreeing with many of their positions. At the time the Republicans called it treason and there were death threats but I believe that a reasonable made a difficult decision to be true to his constituency and remain in the center while the Conservatives pulled the Republicans to the right and the Democrats filled the void they left in the center.
However he accepted money from the Republican PArty to get elected. Threefore he frauded the Republican party and Republicans that contributed to his campaign. If he waited until the Election to switch, I’d have no worries, but he didn’t. Hell if a Democrat did that I’d have issues. You don’t screw over the Party that funded you to get in. It’s like changing the rules mid game.
We finally get a politician who makes sense, is honest, and puts her family and her State first and uneducated idiots in this country (who seem to be in the majority) call her corrupt. I guess they do not know the real definition of that word. and let’s remember that our One-Term President left his job early and he did not even do his job before he left it.
Makes sense, jcspops? Have you ever actually listened to her speak? She babbles to the point on incoherency. Honest? She’s a pathological liar with a trail of scandals trailing her. Family first? She’s a selfish social climber who, long ago, left her husband to be both mom and dad while she pursued her professional interests. And puts her state first? Like taking a leave of absence to run for Vice President and then bailing on the job a few months later? And President Obama left the Senate to become president. Sarah inexplicably left her job to do what? Make money off a book and speaking engagements? Wow, that’s selfless.
ZOMG!! Are you seriously using the fact that her husband is the primary care provider for their children so she can pursue her professional ambition as some sort of indictment on her character?
Spoken like a true “progressive.” Tell us how life is in the Mesazoic era, ya dinosaur.
For reals.
I don’t see you criticizing Michelle Obama for working. She hasn’t spent a day at home with those kids in her life. I love it how the left are all for women’s liberation unless it is someone they hate.
And what exactly is wrong with a stay-at-home dad?
He’s got a penis.
A huge penis.
You been talking to my wife again Tyler.
No, just to the spanish inquisition.
Don’t worry I don’t think it’s Kosher.
I’m not a stay at home dad anymore, Tyler, but thanks.
Makes sense?!?!? This woman doesn’t speak in complete sentances. The uneducated “idiots” of the world are the ones that think that this ding-bat is worthy of public office. Since when did being SMART make you an out of touch elitist?!?! If that’s the case.. she is CERTAINLY not an elitist.
Right. Because EVERYONE knows that all Obama supporters are bona fide Mensa members. With uncanny political savvy!
No one speaks in “sentances.” Make sure you get your text straight before you criticize the intelligence of someone else.
Look ma, another not funny LOL trying to bash conservatives. PSST Pundit Kitchen could you PLEASE POST some funny LOLs or at least non funny LOLs making fun of liberals. You are supposed ot be unbiased.
something that actually reflects that obama is less than perfect would be good.
who needs “jokes” that amount to “bush is bad and obama is good. that’s my obama joke!”
Well see it’s not a joke when it’s true. Obama do no wrong. Bush: everything he did was wrong (especially not allowing those pesky terrorists to blow up more of our buildings and kill American civilians, DAMN HIM!!!)
How about deregulating the banking “industry”? I think this is a mistake, regardless of who does it.
Or having a state run banking industry.
Note that TARP was passed by Bush, not Obama.
Just sayin’.
It was a loan not purcahsing of the bank. Obama’s was actualy purchasing. I’m so tired of people saying first bail out was under Bush. Well two points:
1) IT WAS A LOAN to be repaid.
2) I didn’t like it then either.
They’re supposed to be unbiased? Says who? It’s a privately owned website and they can be as biased as they like. Don’t like it? Take your ‘business’ elsewhere or set up a rivial site. I thought that was capitalism and market freedom, no? Or would you like the government to come in an regulate the site so you don’t get all offended?
They can be as biased as they like, but the site would be in general funnier (and therefore likely more popular, which should = more profitable) if they didn’t rely so greatly on heavy-handed captions that a) aren’t particularly funny; and b) are somewhat jingoistic in their “leftyness”, for want of a better term.
In general, I enjoy the discussion more than the captions, so it’s more of an unsolicited opinion than a complaint, from me.
actually if they want to maximize the number of people who look at their website they should think about going with the majority and not catering to the rest. If 54% like cats and 46% like dogs then good business would be to cater to the cat people, there are more of them. Therefore the site would be well advised to cater to the majority and as demonstrated by the most recent elections that would be the people who prefer Obama.
Too bad the real world isn’t actually binary, huh?
01010110 01100101 01110010 01111001 00100000 01110100 01110010 01110101 01100101 00101110
I thought so, yes.
Awesome response, by the way!
Lol…back in the dark ages, my first boyfriend used to write me notes in binary.
Geek
01010000 01110010 01101111 01110101 01100100 01101100 01111001!
Yeah, we can tell.
HAHAHAHAH I love that joke!
Worldwide, Obama is extremely popular and Palin/Bush are seen as clowns. Plus there’s the problem that people who can use computers and who excel in creative fields tend to be more liberal. Maybe there’s better places to look for conservative ‘humour’ than on internet humour sites, like carved into trees or preached from the pulpit of snake handling churches?
Maybe, or is it just that people who can’t take a joke can’t make them either?
Ah, the joys of seeing people who either only rely on the NYT fixed polls that show a good approval rating or ignore the properly run polls that show a rapidly falling approval rating for Obama. Heaven forbid we be impartial in our analysis!
Agreed!
how the hell is she corrupt?
jesus, i need another place to post where the admins’ heads aren’t up obama’s ass so much. i mean i can stand a little bit. that’s normal. but complete insertion? give me a break.
And not even any lubricant, either! They’ll be walking funny for weeks!
What was that thing about Todd Palin and some of his “buddies” building his house for free? The same buddies who were contractors that also built the massively expensive Wasilla House Complex? Hmmm…. I linked to fox news where Todd talks about his buddies.
Two Sara Palin lols on one page? As if there weren’t more important things going on in the world to poke fun at, way to take the spotlight off Obama I suppose. Besides that, it’s just not funny and this is supposed to be a humor site.
You know once a Democrat gets into office PK goes down hill!!!!!!!! Oh well there goes the neighborhood.
Sarah Palin makes herself a laughing stock on a daily basis, so there are plenty of fish-in-a-barrel lols to be had. If you don’t like it, try and make some obama lols that aren’t just “Lol, Obama’s popular” and “Lol, Obama’s a socialist!!!” which are the only two piss-weak jokes Conservative comedians (is there such a beast? They all seem miserable, humourless, whining little girls with a victim complex, on here at least) can come up with.
How about Obama is a weak nambie pambie Commander in Cheif, sorta like Barney Fife in the old Andy of Mayberry sitcom, just not quite as tough… That’s funny to me, but you won’t see ANY like that no matter how funny they are on here. Oh, and this one, not funny at all but it makes the front page… Go figure.
I dunno, Ceefax, I did this one recently: {http://cheezburger.com/view.aspx?ciid=4521941}. It may not be the funniest damn thing ever, but it’s not “Lol, Obama’s popular” or “Lol, Obama’s a socialist”. Neither is this one (not mine): {http://cheezburger.com/view.aspx?ciid=4631309} or this one (which is mine): {http://cheezburger.com/view.aspx?ciid=4529439}.
Those are funny Diss!! I should register so I can vote I guess…
Obama is the ‘corrupt nut-job’, but we’ll never see that on the ICHC’s homepage. Fairness, equal rights, and equal time don’t exist on ICHC.
I know, right? I mean, those damned lolcats on ICHC will NOT give dogs equal time! That’s why they had to create IHAH for the goggies. DAMNED LOLCATS!
There’s only one problem with that argument; dogs are not as funny as LOLcats!
SPECIST!!!
So, you’re saying you are FOR the “Fairness Doctrine” then?
You mean making the News agencies not promote Obama during his campaign. OOPS sorry I meant report on Obama’s campagin. Or perhaps a TV station setting up a 30 minute infomercial on Obama’s Health Care plan (too bad Billy Mays isn’t available).
Only if we can get comical black and white footage of somebody trying to get health care at a hair salon. “There’s got to be a better way!”
Totally retarded and not even funny…
That’s ok, we welcome all kinds here. *pat pat*
/crickets
Hm, no sense of humor. You must be a republican.
Ivan…… republicans can have humor too…. it’s just well, it just wasn’t that funny. Maybe you needed the drum set to bur ump bumb!! or something..
Of course I don’t have a sense of humor! That’s why my friends are always laughing when I tell jokes and stories. How else would I get them to give me that sort of reaction?
False perception of a person via the internet is false.
Dude, playing the “my friends like me” card is almost as bad as the “my mom thinks I’m special card.” See how you said that thing about how you don’t really know someone over the internet? Yeah it applies both ways. You don’t sound that funny.
My mom thinks I’m kind of an asshole.
My mom tried to abort me last week
I was an accident, but my mommy still says I’m special.
My mom thinks I’m special. But not the good kind of special.
Me too. She says “Oh, you’re special all right.”
My mom’s a goat.
My mother smells of eldeberries… I never knew I had a brother!
Your father was a hamster too!?!?
Couldn’t you have used one that’s actually funny and doesn’t require that you’ve been paying attention to Palin since the election to understand?
I can see Russia in the reflection of her glasses.
I looked at this in a completely different way. I thought it was a satire of the media’s treatment of Palin as evidenced by the unflattering picture, attacks from a “news source” and then the line about ‘predictably’ blaming the media. For example, it’s national news when she argues with David Letterman, but not news when one of our governors is cleared of corruption charges. Perhaps it’s about how the media deserves the blame she attributes to them?
Or not.
See, that’s the funny thing about the whole Letterman/Palin story. It was pretty obvious that the joke was about the 18 year old daughter – you know, the one that’s already been knocked up – not the 14 year old. Yes, the joke was in poor taste. However, a savvy politician would have ignored it, and let the Talk Radio crowd shame Letterman for the jab. Instead, Sister Sarah decided to very publicly take the joke out of context, and more or less call Letterman a pedophile. I would have more sympathy for Palin’s claims of media victimhood if half the time she didn’t bring it upon herself through overreaction.
Or a savy comedian would have known that Palin had her 14 year old daughter with her, not her 18 year old. Or better yet a liberal savy comedian might have observed the wishes of the liberal president and left families out of jokes and campaign slurs. Please oh please Dennis Miller make a joke about the Obama gals, and let us see the diatribe of hate and anger spewing from the left.
Dennis Miller is a fvcking traitor. I hate that guy.
Why’s that? B/c he’s conservative? He’s always been that way.
Hey, like I said, the joke was in poor taste. But that’s what comedians do. Sometimes, they tell bad jokes. Stay in good taste too much, and you become stale. Make edgy jokes, and you’ll sometimes feel the backlash. Letterman apologized for it twice. And, it could just be because I’m a Ball State Cardinal too, but I’m willing to forgive him for ribbing Palin about the resignation a little on his Monday show. There were those on the Right demanding him be fired, after all.
I’m just saying, it’d have been smarter for Palin to have ignored it. But why pass up the chance to play the victim, right? I don’t think Palin has the ability to let it slide off her back. It seems she HAS to react, even when it has nothing to do with her children. So, I’m glad that she’s put herself farther away from the Presidency with her recent resignation. The job needs more temperament than that.
Also… Dennis Miller still has a show somewhere? Huh.
Of legal age or not, Letterman making any sexual joke about an 18 year old is pretty low brow and in very poor taste. Especially on national television.
What? You’re saying no-one should make fun of a LEGAL AGE girl who got pregnant out of wedlock? The one who was paraded all over the US? The daughter of a bible-thumping wing-nut?
Blarg, I’d like you to meet Reality. Reality, Blarg.
Ivan: So families are no longer off limits? Can we get Dennis Miller, or perhaps the lefts favorite man Rush to go out and make fun of Obama’s daughters, and you won’t get upset or offended?
Tell you what, if either of President Obama’s daughters turn up unwed and pregnant, jump on it. AFTER they are 18.
Ok how about Michelle then, she’s over 18, can I start making fun of her?
What do you mean “start?”
I have yet to bash Michelle, or OBama’s children, or John Edwards wife, or Chelsea. I just don’t think it’s the right thing to do. And really I must say the rightest comedians haven’t really gone after Michelle, even Rush as been somewhat quiet on her. They are much easier on her than Hilliary, and the media is on Palin’s family.
One more thing. Why does it have to be that? What if they do something that I find funny or ironic that’s against the liberal ideals? Why does it only have to be something of your choosing? Is that you pushing your ideals on me, just like you’re making fun of Palin and her daughter for?
I never said that it couldn’t be done, just that it was low brow for someone his age to be making those statements about an 18 year old. Pedo bear is giggling in the corner right now, so that should be an indication. But if Letterman wants to lower himself to that level, then by all means, GO FOR IT!
I think the funny thing about it is that apparently there’s still people who watch Letterman…
Oh for fvck’s sake! I’m having pre-election flashbacks. Can we stop rehashing year old arguments and get some funny lols back in here?
I doubt it, but I do have a whole lot of chocolate chip cookie dough in the refrigerator, at this very moment.
Mmmmmm coookies….
Being Funny…. Fail.
Serious political viewpoint…. Fail.
Amen!
The hateful left cant hold a candle to conservative darlings like David Duke, Pat Buchanan, and Savage.
Oh please… that’s like me bringing up the Democrats for being racists and not wanting to abolish slavery… get current will ya.
leave those douche bag relics in the closet where they belong… as mush as they would like to say they are… they mean nothing to us true conservatives…
Tank: David Duke was a Democrat. History! FAIL!!
Corrupt nutjob. Nutjob I can believe.
But I don’t know all the facts. Please point out to me where I can find information of fact-based corruption indictements against Sarah Palin. Otherwise GTFO.
LOL, look at all the crybaby Republicunts boohooing.
Fags
Most of the Republicans have turned on her too, it’s only her extremist nutjob followers that are butthurt about any of this sorry mess she’s created.
Kindly state her extremeist views so we can be the judge if they’re nutjob or not
Troll. Eric/ Eddie/ Jane/ Tyler get the pitchforks!!!
-Blows smoke off pistol-
What was that, ILPB?
Shit!!! Tyler you got blood on me… I just washed these fatigues too!!!!! They’re my best pair, I have a wedding this weekend!!
-Swallows fatigues, washes them around in his mouth for a few minutes and spits them out-
All done.
DUDE!! Did you just eat some tuna?
Ew, no. I don’t eat seafood.
Well, the occasional bearded clam.
But don’t they smell like tuna….. ok I’ll stop there….
You wish, kid.
Spread the love, Gipper. Spread the liberal love.
A (I’m guessing) leftist using “fag” as a derogatory slur? OH THE IRONY!
Also the word “republicunts” as derogatory stands out.
FTR, we liberals do NOT advocate this jackass’s post in the slightest. I mean WOW.
This is seconded. We hereby disown this douchebag form the liberal community and denounce him. No more Huffington Post for you.
Rachel Maddow threw up in her mouth a little there. That one even made Olbermann cringe a little.
(Just a little, though.)
That’s not even worthy of the Huffington Post.
That one was too easy to criticize him for. I wanted more of a thinker zinger. : D
So, if you’re a liberal, why would you use an insult like Republicunt? Cunt is a word that is derogatory towards women, when used as an insult- using part of a woman’s body to call someone weak is a seriously misogynistic argument.
Along with “fags”, if you’re trying to insult Republicans, you’re most likely a liberal, try not to be a hypocrite.
Go Tyler!! Nice to see fair treatment of trolls here, on both sides.
Yeah!
Golf clap.
Golf clap
**CLAP CLAP CLAP**
*whistles* Go get ‘em tiger!
You suck. Leave. Now. Butt fungus.
How bout… Crotch goblin?
Sounds too much like something somebody that hates kids calls babies.
I LOVE kids. They’re so cute.
Except for when they pull my hair. Love the tiny little hands and puffy cheeks, adorable babies! (My family has recently discovered, much to their dismay, that despite my hate for humanity, I have a soft spot for furry animals, dark-humored people, and babies.)
They are pretty darn cute. Good thing, too, or the human race would never have made it….they’re a lot of work, too.
Well, and the fact that sex is fun. That helped.
Oh, yeah. I meant more that if they weren’t cute, there’d have been a lot more infant deaths from neglect and abandonment over the centuries.
…
LOL.
Win Diss is full of win.
Uh, yeah, I don’t like conversations that involve the words “death” and “babies.” I’ll be checking out of this nest, now.
Sorry Eric, I didn’t mean to be insensitive.
Like, really.
Not your fault. It happens. IRL is much harsher to deal with than posts on a silly website anyway, so don’t sweat it. I apologize for the guilt trip.
Holy shit. My bad, Eric :/ /hug
*hugs*
Butt Fungus…
Haven’t heard that before…
Butt Fungus
You can create a whole new class of insults just by adding something gross to the words “butt” or “ass.” Try it! It’s fun!
Also, he’s a tward.
He’s a massive tward, fer sure.
You should not be allowed to post. That was dumb.
It’s OK folks, Something Awful have apologised for making Sarah Palin resign (click name)
Get. A. Life.
Tell me, how is Sarah Palin corrupt? Did she bankrupt our economy during her first 100 days in office? Does she think turning Alaska into a socialist state will make it all better? Do her “extremist nutjob followers” crash church services by claiming that “Jesus was a homo?”
Seriously, people. All of this Palin bashing is getting old.
Here Here!!
Where where??
Behind that tree. I saw something moving.
It’s Osama again.
We have got to get a lock on that garbage can.
But don’t confuse it with Oscar’s grabage can, everyone needs a good grouch around.
No, Osama digs around in my garbage. And now my garden hose is missing. What is he planning to do with a garden hose?
-Winks and bends over-
Aww, nastyyy..
Scratch the eyes! Scratch the eyes!!!
Where wolf?
There wolf!
-Tazes the name Twilyght off the boards-
Now, to address your comments. I agree, Palin-bashing is REALLY old, but Obama (I assume that’s what you’re referring to) didn’t bankrupt the economy.
And, even if Obama was trying to make America a socialist state, which is what you’re clearly implying, it wouldn’t be corrupt, it would be idiotic. He’s not being given bribes to make us all socialists, now is he?
DISCRIMINAYSHUN AGAINST FANGIRLS!!!!!!!!
*Runs off to leave lipstick marks on the giant Edward Cullen poster*
-Sighs and gets the rope, searches for a suitable tree-
The only possible excuse I have is that I’m… a WIIIIITTCHHH! -Jumps-
No no no you burn a witch!!!
Crowd: She’s a witch burn her….
No, No, you hang them then you burn them…
No first you either drown them and see if they float, if they float they’re innocent if they sink they’re a witch. Or you throw them off a cliff, if they fly then they’re a witch, if they crash and die below they’re a well trained witch.
-Giggles and froths at mouth- I need to be changed!
If they run they’re VC, if they stand still they’re a well disciplined VC!!!!!
Do you shoot women and children?
Sometimes yeah
How, I mean how can you shoot women and chidlren.
Easy! You just don’t lead’em as much!!!!
Quick name that movie!!!
Witches don’t like fangirls?
No, but it’s the only plausible excuse for killing myself because of a fangirl overload.
By the way, are you really a fan?
I just started watching. I saw the seventh season and I didn’t realise until I noticed I was cheering “Yaaaay!!! SPIKE SPIKEY Spike Spike!!!” Every time he appeared on screen…
How does one cure a case of the fangirls?
Lol..I was going to suggest “watch the last season, after he got his soul and went all whiny”, but that’s the season you’re watching, so….I got nothin’. I liked mid-season-4 through season 6 chipped-Spike just unreasonably much, though.
He used to be MORE Awesome??? I’ve just watched all of season 7 and have been really annoying my sister talking about it. I’m a bit Buffy’d out after all that, actually. Which season should I watch next d’you think? I heard 5 was good….
I actually preferred Angel, but that’s because I’m probably more stereotypical macho-ego
I just saw him when he turned up in season 7. He annoyed me. The pansy…
Agreed. He was a pansy in BTVS S7.
The last few seasons of his own show, he and the humor got bumped up a notch though. Especially when he was turned into a puppet-pire and was fighting with Spike in felt-form… that was hilarious.
I heard Spike came back in Angel.
So I no has a sad about him frying up.
Thou shall not speak ill of Angel!
AC, I’d start with 1, honestly. They’re all good in their own way, although a lot of people think it really went downhill after 5.
You’ll probably get a kick out of original-recipe Pure Evil Spike, too.
I don’t get a kick out of Spike!
/denial
Ok! Is looking forward to it.
…My sister will hate me before long,,,
Which could pay her back for her mild Twilight obsession, actually…
I can help you put her out of her misery, if you want.
(by the way, I’ll be on facebook in a jiffy- sorry about the internet fail.)
hahaha i hope you are not implying that Obama bankrupted our economy. That’s a convenient overlook of the past EIGHT YEARS! Things were peachy and there were JOBS A PLENTLY on January 20th.. then on the 21st… armageddon…..? Idiot.
Not for me… It’s making me look further into why the DNC would be SO damn afraid of here that it has to sick the mainstream media machine on her… it’s all good.
just a few more years and we’ll put it all to the test
She bankrupted Wasilla. Is that good enough? Besides, Alaska’s already a “socialist” state, what with the taxing the oil corporations to hand out free money to Alaskan residents.
I kinda like palin it seems like she could do a decent job…
the reason I don’t like the left is because of there feelgood polices (Did I get that from somwhere?) alot of there polices are good in theory but ineffective when put into action like it’s good to give a homless dude some cash even better to give him shelter and food but the best thing you can do is to help him find a job….
I’m gonna give obama a little bit of room to screw up but if I don’t see any progress soon well somones gonna go postal
I think we’ll see a whole LOT of people going postal!
If you don’t learn to use some fvcking punctuation I’M gonna go postal!!!!
Yes. Theoretical police are far less effective at law enforcement than actual live officers.
I think going postal is so last year. I’m going UPS-ish.
:loads shotgun:
I’m going Kinko’s FedEx on y’all…
*Loads piantball gun*
I’m going DHL on you, in my perty yellow truck.
IT WAS THE GOTCHA LIBERAL MEDIA!!!!!!
What’s so wrong with a single word anyway? It’s a lol and its general message is true. It’s like you people want to discuss politics here.
Anyway, she WAS corrupt because of the whole wardrobe thing.
No, she did not buy those clothes, they were bought for her. Why don’t you know that already? She gave all those clothes back.
She didn’t really want to say anything about it.
what the hell, why are all these “lolz” so damn liberal? “corrupt nut job” how is that funny?
It’s not funny, but that doesn’t seem to matter.
Although the more I see the words “corrupt nut job” together, the more I think it sounds like a slang term for some kind of sex thing.
Meh. I agree. We need funnier, equal-opportunity LOLZ. I’d rather get a bunch of hilarious ones that I disagree with the politics of rather than bash Sarah or Obama-worship ones all day.
Let’s bash Sarah more
Yawn. More lies from the liberal left. Sarah Palin may be a lot of things…but corrupt is not one of them. (Nor is she a “nutjob”, but that’s a discussion for another day.) She has never done anything illegal, but the left’s only weapons against her are lies and slander.
Not true, we have such weapons at our disposal such as the element of suprise, fear, efficiency and an almost fanatical devotion to the pope!
And nice red uniforms.
And logic, don’t forget logic.
Apologies, ruthless efficiency, not just efficiency.
The Pope? don’t you mean the Flying Speghetti Monster?
Cardinal Biggles… fetch…
THE COMFY CHAIR!!!
Come in again.
She’ll have to fumigate the White House after kicking out ol ‘Bammy. And there will be pork served there for the first time in 4 years!
BaDaBing!
She sure has these democrats scared. My vote will go to her.
Hah, I love it – The more I see of this, the more I realize that the left is scared to death of her.
Oh, the things you try to convince yourselves of. Why would anyone ever be scared of her? She’s so…irrelevant to politics at the moment that she won’t ever be in a high state of power – BECAUSE SHE’S AN IDIOT!! McCain picked her for his VP candidate simply because he’s old and going crazy. And yet now that the election’s over with the only possible outcome, the media is still focused on her. Whatever for? So that conservatives who are OUT OF THEIR MIND can support her from President or something?!!
This woman will continue to be vilified until she apologizes publicly for inciting Klan Rallies during the 2008 Presidential race. In response to her “palled around with terrorists” comments she heard and encouraged “Kill Him” and “Bomb Him” chants. At least McCain had the civility to shut that down. Obama did the same with his “Don’t ‘boo’ – I don’t need that. I just need your vote” comments.
Sarah’s behavior gave license to the formerly hooded racists to wreak havoc and violence on citizens. But then, that must have been the intent — appeal to “the base”.
Yep. She will continue to be vilified and she has the power to change that — apologize and set “the base” straight. She hasn’t and probably won’t do that. She wears a “Christian” badge on her sleeve but she does not behave as one.
Cite, or it didn’t happen.
Use google and/or youtube. You’ll learn a lot.
Oooh, what an original non-answer!
So, are you going to prove yourself, or are you admitting you’re full of sh!t?
Well said, Beryl.
Beryl: Wait wasn’t it the Black Panthers intimidating people at a voting booth in Philly? Oh wait, no couldn’t be, b/c Obama let them go.
I can’t understand why people can’t treat her like a human being! What ever happened to “love thy neighbor”!?!?!? This is a disgrace, all people who think making fun of a kind woman who got very far in her work and loves her family are extremely hateful. I can’t help thinking that if she was a democrat none of the media would DARE make fun of her or her kids.
The media didn’t make fun of her under-aged children. That never happened. However, the media goes after Dems and Repubs alike. You must have forgotten about how they treated Blago and Burris. Sarah doesn’t get a pass.
The problem with her is that she can dish it with nasty comments about others but can’t take it.
I’m still waiting for you to back up anything you’ve said…even one little thing…
I don’t respond to trolls, which you are, except to remind them that they are trolls.
Liberals never back up statements with citations or facts…they deflect, skip to another instance, place blame on former wrongdoings, claim “racism”, repeat leftist mantras and campaign slogans, drink the kool aid, personally insult you, and then run away.
Anyone who gets in the way of their Messiah (Obama) will be destroyed.
Yeah… Blago and Burris were CRIMINALS!
Doosh.
Silly Liberals
Silly judgmental drive-by commenter.
Hit-and-run Troll hits then runs.
…..
….
…
..
.
THIS IS A PLACE TO LAUGH, NOT TO CRITICIZE POLITICAL VIEWPOINTS WITH PROPAGANDA!!!!!
Yes, that means you, right-wing fanatics.
As in, you fanatics unfairly criticize people who have a different viewpoints. Please stop. I do not wish to offend anyone, but this is ridiculous.
Hi. You’re new here, so you don’t know anything about the way this site is set up.
-
If you don’t like the political viewpoints, debates, and other things that go along with free human beings having differences of opinions that run the gamut from name-calling to actual civil debate, then feel free to leave. Just make sure that door doesn’t hit you on the way out.
-
And your broad brush only calling out right-wingers is extremely offensive, and shows that you have no clue who posts here.
Sorry. I am offended by all name calling.
It’s just that the last few posts on this….well….post really tick me off.
But no, I am not new here.
I know we have differences in opinion and I respect that.
If I gave a bad impression…..
WERE CAN I GET SARAH PALIN NUTJOB BUMBER STICKERS .I COULD SELL A MILLION OF THEM
At the same store that sells caps lock keys. Look into it, won’t you?
568th
Okay, I just have to say:
The media really did give Sarah Palin a hard time. What would YOU do if it was your daughter that was getting made fun of?