Fun with politics and news! Covering Lol Politics and Lol News. Breaking news — lol-style.
 

« Previous | Next »

2 out of 3 men in this picture



bill clinton and barack obama

2 out of 3 men in this picture look Presidential wearing a red tie

(Bill Clinton and Barack Obama)

Here are a couple that look a little lacking

Picture by: nyheter.no Caption by: dunno source via Our LOL Builder

» Recaption This!

» View All Captions

Incorrect source or offensive?

Add this to your blog:
(Copy & paste code)

You May Like:

» 458 comments

  1. Semperfidd says:

    Yes the fat guy in the back does look like an American president

  2. ay dios mio EWAdams no es gracioso says:

    I know, that white haired guy just looks like he’s chasing some tail.

  3. Wolfman Jack says:

    Two of them look like wimpy Socialists.

    • pittypat says:

      MURRRRRDEREEEEERRRRRRS!!1!

    • The Steve says:

      Oh, so socialism is no longer an evil and powerful regime trying to take over America..it’s just a couple wimpy lookin’ guys.

      That doesn’t seem like such a big deal.

      • HelOnWheels says:

        But we must remain ever vigilant. We must now focus on the specter of the most evil of evils: COMMUNISM!! *gasp*

        • Mina says:

          CONSTANT VIGILANCE!

          :)

        • Communism will DEVOUR OUR HEARTS AND CRAP OUT OUR SOULS!!!!!

          • Mina says:

            I was wondering why I felt like crap today and now I understand. I must have been gotten by the Communists.

            • Jane St.Clair says:

              You should really wash your hands to prevent the spread of Communism.

              • Mina says:

                I’m religious about washing my hands. I must have picked it up from someone in the office.

              • No no no, you wash your hands to prevent the swine flu, and as we all know, the capitalists are the PIGS!!11!!!11!!

                • Semperfidd says:

                  Capitalists created this forum for you to spew your socialistic views….just sayin

                  • trollybaby says:

                    And this country for them to create this forum in…

                  • *waves fingers in front of Semperfidd* Oooooh socialism….ooooh socialism gonna getcha!

                    • thegoof529 says:

                      u know what y dont u just move to north korea

                      • HelOnWheels says:

                        Why don’t you go back to grade school and brush up on those English skills…and some economics and history. WTH, just retake 6th grade while you’re at it. BTW, North Korea =/= true socialism. North Korea =/= extreme dictatorial state where the means of production are kinda “owned” and run by Kim Jong.

                        • Danbala says:

                          NUH-UH! It’s a people’s democratic republic, so there! (Because we all know that what things are called is the only thing that matters.)

                        • thegoof529 says:

                          actually im taking economics history and English all right now maybe you need to learn more about north Korea

                        • While I agree with you on both points, being goof’s lack of basic English skills, and that NK =/= socialism, I would like to ask, when in history has socialism not turned into some form of a dictatorship? With the exception of the nations that are in the process of turning back from it now.

                        • HelOnWheels says:

                          JAC, take a look at Scandinavia. Granted, they’re all “mixed” socialism but they make it work. Socialism, by it’s very definition, requires a strong cetralized government. So, I believe because of human nature, there will be people who will use that to make power grabs.

                        • HelOnWheels says:

                          @goof – You need to ask for your money back from that school you attend because they’re ripping you off.

                        • HOW, Amen. And that’s my biggest problem with it. And Scandinavia is not even that large of a country, unless I’m waaaaaaaay out of date with my information.
                          I think the Founding Fathers, who were not diety, as some have implied I think they are, were right about the dangers of a large central govt.
                          I’m actually not opposed to a lot of the things that people want out of a socialistic govt, but done on a local level, with strong limits on what it can control in a person’s life. And certainly with the ability to opt out of any govt plan.

                        • Danbala says:

                          “And Scandinavia is not even that large of a country, unless I’m waaaaaaaay out of date with my information.”

                          Scandinavia is in fact not a country at all, no.

                          I think size oughtn’t matter on how well a given system works – it’s a matter of subdividing government into appropriate regions and matters no matter what system you go for.

                        • HelOnWheels says:

                          Thanks, D. I was just about to correct SAC about Scandinavia =/= country. However, it is -also- about how well a system works. The subdivisions, done the right way, are what help make it successful; that’s not the only reason but it is a part of it.

                        • Danbala says:

                          Oh, indeed – I formulated that rather weirdly. I meant that a system that works works independent of size if the subdividing is good – not that subdividing makes any system good! :)

                        • guest says:

                          Actually North Korea is a perfect example of one form of Socialism. There are two main lines of thinking in Socialism:
                          Some socialists advocate complete nationalization of the means of production, distribution, and exchange; others advocate state control of capital within the framework of a market economy. North Korea would be the former, while China is moving towards the latter.

                      • PortlandMark says:

                        Main Entry: de·moc·ra·cy
                        Pronunciation: \di-ˈmä-krə-sē\
                        Function: noun
                        Inflected Form(s): plural de·moc·ra·cies
                        Etymology: Middle French democratie, from Late Latin democratia, from Greek dēmokratia, from dēmos + -kratia -cracy
                        Date: 1576
                        1 a : government by the people; especially : rule of the majority b : a government in which the supreme power is vested in the people and exercised by them directly or indirectly through a system of representation usually involving periodically held free elections
                        2 : a political unit that has a democratic government
                        3 capitalized : the principles and policies of the Democratic party in the United States
                        4 : the common people especially when constituting the source of political authority
                        5 : the absence of hereditary or arbitrary class distinctions or privileges

                        Hmm, nothing in there about silencing one’s political adversaries or exiling them to another country. Are you sure you’re an American 529?

                        • HelOnWheels says:

                          If you don’t think America is THE BESTEST IN THE WORLD AND CAN DO NOTHING WRONG then you, sir, are un-American and a TERRORIST!!! Especially if you voice your feelings, a right that’s granted to you by the Constitution (which must be un-American too because it gave -you- that right!)!!!

                      • i dont want 2 moov 2 north korea
                        i like living hear
                        you dont like it thats tuff shit goof
                        i have teh furst amendmant i can talk abowt socialism al i want

                        That was hard to write. And just about crashed Firefox’s spell check.

  4. PortlandMark says:

    In before “You stupid people at PK are just in the tank for Obama… and quit making fun of Bush!”

  5. Foamer says:

    Looking Presidential unfortunately has no impact on acting Presidential or behaving Presidential, which pretty much zaps everyone but the guy behind the pole.

    • The Steve says:

      Are you saying he’s acting presidential?

      I’ll have to start wearing my tie with a tiny little knot like that more often…

    • BJello92 says:

      Dude! Ai totally agree wiff yewz! No impact what-so-freaking-ever!! WTF ish up wiff dat yo?

    • Sooooooo, which of our presidents have ACTED presidential? And what constitutes acting presidential anyway? Don’t they ALL have skeletons in their closet?

      • Some of them have wooden teeth in the closet. Or at least the spares.

      • I hear Dennis Haysbert is good at acting presidential.

      • gniknihtdrawkcab says:

        How about not being ashamed of their country and begging the world to forgive us for being Americans? Wait, you asked what constitutes acting presidential, not what constitutes acting like a whiny bitch that is more worried about his popularity among the other leaders than trying to fix a broken country.

        Well, how about a little pride in your country? And, no, I don’t think he has much pride when all he tells the world how ashamed he is of the way we are. Yes, I am summing up his words, but do you apologize for something you’re not ashamed of?

        • WARNING: FROTHY RANT TO FOLLOW:
          When our country has acted like a bunch of pompous jackasses who can go blow up whoever the fvck we want, then yeah, we’ve got some fvcking explaining to do. If other countries pulled the shit we pulled, they’d be getting sanctions and embargoes and have other countries trying to stop them. But we’re fvcking AMERICA! We can do whatever the fvck we want, right? It’s okay if the entire rest of the world thinks we’re sleazeballs because of what Bush did, ‘cos we’re America and we’re ALWAYS the good guy! It’s a bunch of horse shit. We fvcked up, and we should apologize for the mistakes we’ve made. You can still be proud of your country and still be ashamed of its actions. Are you proud of the Civil War? The Trail of Tears? The Japanese camps of WWII? Watergate? Iran-Contra? Clinton’s impeachment? Is it okay when it’s our country is doing it? Taking pride in your country doesn’t mind blindly going along with everything we do while screaming “USA.”
          And the first person who bitches about Obama bowing gets kicked in the balls. God forbid our president tries to respect another country’s culture. We shouldn’t bow to them! We should beat their asses and say “We’re fvcking America! Recognize, bitch!” Because we’re America and every other country sucks because they’re not us!!!!
          /frothy annoyed rant

          • lowly grunt says:

            I’m glad you have the energy to respond because jerkface deserved something and I’m too pooped.

            Bravo!

            • I’ve been fired up since the flap over the bow to the Japanese started.

              • Jane St.Clair says:

                *psst* He, um, probably is proud of Clinton’s impeachment.

              • Default User says:

                Ohmigod! He was respectful of another cultures customs! Socialist! Muslim! Hitler! Gay!

                • I know, right? The American president should show his superiority by bitch slapping other world leaders and fvcking their wives (or them if the world leader is a woman). Then blowing the shit out of a random city just to show them who’s boss. Who cares if they’re not actually an enemy?

                  • Default User says:

                    Well, Obama is also gay so he can fsck the world leaders even if they aren’t women. I was hoping this administration would choose to attack paupa new guinea mostly because I like to say the name and it would be a good excuse to say it a lot but so far the jerks made no attempt to attack anywhere!

                    • guest says:

                      Oh, you’re kind of wrong there too Default Loser. You see, just because Obama didn’t start a war doesn’t mean he isn’t involved in a war. He actually is attacking people in Iraq and Afghanistan right now. As president he has the power to stop those wars if he really wanted to, but he doesn’t. He can give lip service to peace all he wants, but I’m not buying any of it as long as there are U.S. troops in other countries fighting the same two wars we had before he showed up.

                      • Default User says:

                        /giggle
                        Are your arguments so weak that you have to attack my name?
                        He sorta inherited that war when he became president. He’s working to remove troops from Iraq while leaving the country as stable as possible so another dictator like Sadam doesn’t rise to power as soon as were gone.

                        • guest says:

                          What about Afghanistan? He isn’t in a rush to leave there. Bush already had signed the agreement to pull troops out of Iraq before Obama even got into office. I don’t see Obama doing anything different than Bush.

                        • viking gal says:

                          You don’t rush into or out of a war in Afghanistan. For one, if you rushed out, the solders last to leave would be in an extremely dangerous situation. Because the villagers have come to depend on the USA to prevent the taliban from coming back and throwing acid on the faces of their wives and daughters. And we have made some promises there, so I wouldn’t blame the villagers for attacking in justifiable anger.

                        • guest says:

                          That’s what George Bush was doing too.

                  • The Steve says:

                    I would fvck Sakozy’s wife….that’s for sure.

          • gniknihtdrawkcab says:

            I know you want to believe that we just went in by ourselves, but that is not true. Yes, we were the major player, but it wasn’t just America. Besides, the UN gave Iraq, what, 17 sanctions? And, how far did that go? You want to cry about not finding WMDs, but you know he had them. Where did they go? That was all he had to do was produce them, or show that they were destroyed. No, I don’t think we should be ashamed of that.

            Also, if our president thinks that there is a good chance that another country is planning to attack us, whether it’s directly or indirectly by allowing terrorists to train in their country, then yes, I think it is his duty to take action. And, this wasn’t just the US intelligence. It was a consensus among the entire world.

            I know you want to blame it all on Bush, but then there’s this:
            “[W]e urge you, after consulting with Congress, and consistent with the U.S. Constitution and laws, to take necessary actions (including, if appropriate, air and missile strikes on suspect Iraqi sites) to respond effectively to the threat posed by Iraq’s refusal to end its weapons of mass destruction programs.” — From a letter signed by Joe Lieberman, Dianne Feinstein, Barbara A. Milulski, Tom Daschle, & John Kerry among others on October 9, 1998

            Yes, we invaded, but that’s because Bush didn’t want to just throw millions of dollars away for nothing. We put an end to it.

            So, are you really that ashamed that we protected ourselves, and possibly other countries?

            • Default User says:

              Saddam was batsh*t crazy, but he wasn’t stupid. I would guess he knew that attacking the US would be a fatal move and therefore he never did. I know of no evidence that he was planning to attack us or any other country for that matter. And the evidence presented for WMDs was shoddy at best and makes it unsurprising that we didn’t find anything because there was nothing there to find.

              • Jane St.Clair says:

                But… but… you KNOW that he had them! gniknihtdrawkcab said so!

              • keithybabes says:

                Well he did invade Kuwait, so he had a bit of previous..

                • viking gal says:

                  He also sent significant money to the families of Palestinian suicide bombers. Which qualifies as meddling in the affairs of Israel/Palestine.

              • jim says:

                Whether Iraq had WMDs was never a question, it had used them. Fromthe congressional resolution authorizing the use of force against Iraq:

                “Whereas the current Iraqi regime has demonstrated its capability and willingness to use weapons of mass destruction against other nations and its own people”

                • viking gal says:

                  Also, we sold those WMDs to Iraq, as a ‘balance’ for Iran. I think Cheney was part of the administration back then…
                  The question is whether the WMDs still existed at the time of the US invasion, or whether they had all been used or dismantled for parts.

                  • Default User says:

                    And we had sold them with the intent of them being used against Iran. Because we don’t like Iran.

                  • jim says:

                    The sale to Iran was a good thing, it prevented Iran from overrunning Iraq, which it seemed they would do. In any case there were WMDs in Iraq:

                    {http://townhall.com/columnists/HughHewitt/2006/06/22/the_real_story_on_wmds_needs_to_be_told_–_but_carefully}

                    But not only could we not find them before the war, Saddam was successfully preventing us from inspecting them on his military sites. It was only after we invaded that they started showing up as ieds and dumped all over the country. Someone had to dump them there. Did they dump all of them, or just the ones that were aging off?

                    • jim says:

                      Just in case that link doesnt work, pull on santorum wmd and hewitt

                      • viking gal says:

                        Symantex and a cell phone does not a WMD make.

                        • HelOnWheels says:

                          It does if you’re looking for ANY excuse.

                        • jim says:

                          No they were strapping them to the ieds and blowing them up together, they were wmds

                        • viking gal says:

                          It certainly makes a weapon, and creates serious devastation on whomever is in that neighborhood…which might be large in a city. But WMD implies taking out the whole of a city. “Mass” destruction, after all.

                        • jim says:

                          Looking for any excuse to what?

                        • Default User says:

                          To invade a country I believe.

                        • HelOnWheels says:

                          Yes, Default, thanks. I must be having one of those “complete thoughts not reaching fingers” days.

                        • jim says:

                          not necessarily, like nuclear artillery shells, some are designed for use against military units. For a chemical weapon, I cant imagine its range of effectiveness can be very extensive once it is in the open air.

                        • viking gal says:

                          @jim. I have yet to hear of any nuclear, biological or non-explosive chemical substances to have been found at any IED site. That doesn’t mean it didn’t happen, but I have been keeping my ear out for such a report. I do know that they found a warehouse or some such large space with traces of radioactivity all over it, but not at any IED site. So forgive me if I maintain my stance of ‘no proof yet’.

                        • viking gal says:

                          @jim. Mustard Gas. Destroyed the lungs of many, many soldiers in WWI. Truly evil stuff, and not that hard to make–and it aerosolizes very nicely. There are also some ‘lovely’ neurotoxins which would similarly aerosolize very well.
                          BTW, I teach science at the college level, medical-related stuff.

                        • jim says:

                          We didnt have to look for an excuse to invade Iraq, we could have used any of the dozen UN resolutions. Iraq was not living up to the agreements it made to end the first war, one of which was to let us examine their arsenals of wmds. I still dont see the point to these UN resolutions, countries like North Korea, Iran, and Iraq are going to ignore them anyway, and the UN isnt willing to enforce them.

                        • jim says:

                          I suppose mustard gas was more effective in WWI because it was a trench war and the gas settled into the trenches. I was thinking more about how far near to the ground a chemical weapon might carry if it was blown up say a block or two from you. I do remember from basic our drills telling us we were toast if we did get gassed. Those atropine shots were intended to keep us going long enough to complete the mission.

                        • jim says:

                          I think the tie to ieds appears in the original report that declassified the info about the wmds. Some of the guys coming back should know.

            • Jane St.Clair says:

              I don’t think I can afford this rant. It must be at least 5 dollars on the paranoid half truth and innuendo truck. Do you have anything cheaper?

              • lowly grunt says:

                The economy hits everyone eventually. Don’t blame a guy for trying to make a buck or three. Or ten.

                I just went past it on the other side; that crazy cart was blocking the sidewalk.

            • Wow, you bought all that? You sure are gullible. Saddam had nothing. And we had a couple countries’ support, but only the ones trying to suck up to us (Britain for example). We put an end to it? It’s over? Then why are still there if it’s over? “Mission accomplished” was years ago.

              We weren’t protecting anyone. We were bullying another country under the guise of protecting ourselves from a threat, and when it came to time to prove that threat, we FAILED. The Iraq War was a massive embarrassment. If we had actually protected ourselves, that would be one thing. But we’re now just the world’s biggest bully.

              • guest says:

                A couple of countries if you define a couple as 20. I only define a couple as 2 unless it’s a really crazy night.

              • gniknihtdrawkcab says:

                Bought into what? That other countries’ intelligence said he had them as well? Yeah, it’s pretty well documented. And, are you saying that the hundreds of thousands of his own people that he put to death didn’t happen? I guess the holocaust didn’t happen either.

                And, you do know we are still in Germany, right? No, we’re not getting attacked there, but that’s not my point. My point is that when we invade, we usually leave people behind. And, this is not a conventional war. It’s not our military against theirs. They hide, they use citizens as shields, etc. And, even when everything’s settled down, I believe we will leave part of our military there.

                The problem I have with your point of view is that someone has to actually attack us before you believe we have a right to attack back. I don’t follow that line of thinking. If my neighbor (or even someone in the next county over) kept looking at my house through a scope on a high powered rifle, I would probably do something about it. Especially if he had made comments about how I (or my family) should die.

                In my opinion, you are the gullible one. You don’t want to believe that there are actually bad people in the world that would cut your heart out at the drop of a hat for no real reason other than you’re not like them.

                • Default User says:

                  Stalin killed millions of his own people but we went all buddy buddy with him in WWII to fight the Germans.

                  I know we’re still in Germany and Japan as well. Though I don’t recall a noticeable death rate from either of those countries regarding US Troops.

                  Still, evidence of scope and high powered rifle was shoddy at best and was never found.

                  • gniknihtdrawkcab says:

                    All arguments aside, I am curious about what the death rate was in German and Japan around 1945 – 1950.

                    And, I didn’t figure you’d like the high powered rifle analogy. What I was getting at is that if I thought that my family was in danger, I would take care of that danger, if I could. It was the best I could come up with while writing SQL scripts.

                    • Default User says:

                      My point stands. There was little to no evidence that he was going to attack us. There was definitely no evidence that he was in league with bin laden who we were supposed to be going after. Bin Laden actually hated the man and considered him to be an infidel as well.

                      • guest says:

                        Bill Clinton bombed Iraq in 1998 without getting permission from the UN and without evidence of a threat. I haven’t heard anyone complain about Clinton being a bully. Every president has had problems with Saddam Hussein ever since he decided to use chemical weapons on his own people. He was a monster and we will be better off in the long run with him gone.

                        • I’ll give you that Saddam was a batshit monster, and that I don’t miss him at all. Very odd though that of all the batshit monster dictators we’d go after him. Hmmm. He wasn’t a direct threat at all. He was an asshole who acted big and liked picking on countries smaller than him (Kuwait). But the way he acted after the first Gulf War was some sad little attempts at rebelling against the UN sanctions. Try to act like a big man when he wasn’t really one. Was this really worth the lives of thousands of our soldiers?
                          As for Clinton bombing Iraq in ‘98, that’s a far cry from an invasion. That was a hand slap.

                      • guest says:

                        So by your logic we should never have attacked Germany? There was no evidence they would attack us either. We should have just set back then or just fought Japan. It’s not enough of a reason that the leader of the country is a lunatic bent on world domination who doesn’t mind killing his own people to reach his goal?

                        • Default User says:

                          Well, there was the whole bit where they attacked our allies, the British and took over France. We even resisted entering the war at first but there was some incident with a passenger ship in Britain with US passengers that got people a little upset.

                        • guest says:

                          I didn’t say our allies, I said us. Besides if you want to include incidents you could talk about Iraq shooting at our planes in 1999 and ignoring the no fly zones they had agreed to.

                  • guest says:

                    We didn’t go all buddy buddy with Stalin. Yes, we fought on the same side but there were many Americans that wanted to take out Russia after we defeated the Germans. General Patton comes to mind first. Here is what he thought of Russia:

                    The Russians are mongols. They are Slavs and a lot of them used to be ruled by ancient Byzantium. From Genghis Kahn to Stalin, they have not changed. They never will and we will never learn, at least, not until it is too late.

                    We have destroyed what could have been a good race of people and we are about to replace them with mongolian savages and all of Europe with communism.

                    If it should be necessary for us to fight the Russians, the sooner we do it, the better.

                    We could have arrived sooner but for the fact that if one flies over Russian occupied territory they shoot at you. Nice friends.

                    The difficulty in understanding the Russian is that we do not take cognizance of the fact that he is not a European, but an Asiatic and therefore thinks deviously. We can no more understand a Russian than a Chinese or a Japanese. From what I have seen of them I have no particular desire to understand them except to ascertain how much lead or iron it takes to kill them. In addition to his other amiable characteristics, the Russians have no regard for human life and they are all out sons of bitches, barbarians, and chronic drunks.

                    I believe that Germany should not be destroyed, but rather should be rebuilt as a buffer against the real danger, which is Russia and it’s Bolshevism.

                    Russia knows what it wants. World domination. And she is laying her plans accordingly. We, on the other hand, and England, and France to a lesser extent, don’t know what we want and get less than nothing as the result.

                    Let’s keep our boots polished, bayonets sharpened, and present a picture of force and strength to the Russians. This is the only language that they understand and respect. If you fail to do this, then I would like to say that we have had a victory over the Germans, and have disarmed them, but we have lost the war.

                    There are all kinds of low class slime who are trying and will continue to try to wreck this country from the inside. Most of them don’t know it, but they are actually working for the Russians. Some of them do know it, though. It doesn’t matter whether they call themselves communists, socialists, or just plain liberals. That is what they are doing.

                    • Default User says:

                      He seemed a bit racist against the Russians didn’t he? We did “keep our boots polished, bayonets sharpened, and present a picture of force and strength to the Russians.” and won the cold war without invading. Worked out pretty well without sending in thousands of troops to get slaughtered.

                      • guest says:

                        Yeah, unfortunately he never figured out what to do with people like you. The low class slime who are trying and will continue to try to wreck this country from the inside whether they call themselves communists, socialists, or just plain liberals.

                        • guest says:

                          He wasn’t racist against the Russians, he just understood them too well. Who won the cold war? We wisely kept up with the Russians in the arms race even though we had to drag a lot of Democrats kicking and screaming. If we had disarmed without preconditions or just quit trying to compete we would be speaking Russian by now. That’s why it pays to have a strong military.

                        • Low class slime?! Wreck this country from the inside? I’ve never liked you, guest, but now it’s more than obvious that you are nothing more than a squished piece of dog shit that your mom left in Eddie’s yard. Guess what, pal, YOU are what’s wrong with America. You’re a lousy American, and you’re gonna ruin this country, not Default User, or me, or Obama, or any other liberal. Eat shit and die.

                        • Default User says:

                          Again, are your own arguments so weak that you have to insult me in order to make yourself fell better?

                        • Wow, quite the racist, fvcktard, aren’t we? You’re the kind that the Republicans love to recruit. “Russians are scum. We’re the superior race.” You’re pathetic.

                        • You know, I was some what in support of your arguments in this debate, but it boggles the mind why you chose to take the low road. Just because someone has a differing opinion than you doesn’t mean that they are trying to ruin the country. That smack of McCarthyism and should never be tolerated. You don’t like the direction the discussion is taking, disengage and move on. Otherwise, do try and keep it above board, ok?

                        • trollybaby says:

                          Rando, why should anyone give a sh$t if you like them or not? Is that supposed to punish people from speaking their minds because you happen to dissapprove? You think a little bit too much of yourself and your influence. What you think about one poster or another has nothing to do with any argument.

                        • guest says:

                          I was just quoting Patton. I think he hit the nail on the head though. If you are so in love with the ideals of communism or socialism there are plenty of other countries you can move to without trying to make us something we are not and were never intended to be.

                        • guest says:

                          Rando is one of the ones who knows what he is doing and is doing it intentionally. Maybe not to wreck the country, but to try to mold it into his own little communist utopia.

                        • viking gal says:

                          Sorry guest, but Seth was the communist. Rando is simply a lefty liberal. And for the record, I consider myself a liberal/libertarian hybrid. And being a liberal is not being anti-patriotic. I was very proud of a couple young men I know who signed up to serve when they were old enough. I’m too old and asthmatic to serve, but I can train young people in medical-related fields to better serve those who are in need. And I care enough about this country to pay attention, vote regularly, and NOT tune out when someone accuses me of being unpatriotic because they disagree with my politics.

                        • Default User says:

                          I’m not in love with communism. I like the theory but don’t believe it would ever work. We are trying to make this country into a great place to live and a place to be proud to live. If you don’t like the way were going about doing that then I recomend you run for public office and try to change it. Don’t go around insulting people just because you can’t get them to agree with you. It’s that kind of behavior that will tear this country apart. Not terrorists. Not socialism. Not the Christian right. But people acting like selfish whiny 6 year olds who can’t stop and listen to the other side for five minutes without calling them a doody head.

                        • Oh please, Rando a communist? Besides, who are you to say whether the utopia he has in mind is an altogether bad thing? It doesn’t look like the one your group tried to put together isn’t working out all that well. And before you even suggest it, 1) I’m not a Democrat, 2) I’m not a communist or socialist, and 3) I still consider myself a Republican, just not the current flavor of the month.

                        • guest, I’ve said many times that I know better than to believe that communism would ever work. I like the ideals of it, but I’m not stupid. And I never, ever believe it would even be attempted here. You think the country is moving towards socialism? Eh, maybe a little bit, but again, I don’t see it taking over everything. But we’ve had bits of socialism for a long, long time.
                          It’s very flattering that you think I would be able to mold this country into something I want. Obviously, I can’t. I can support politicians who share my views, but I’m not planning a communist revolution. How stupid. I joke about it a lot here, and in an ideal world I’d like to see it happen, but it’s just not practical.
                          As for trollybaby, I don’t give two shits if anyone likes or dislikes what I say about guest. He’s a vile little conservatroll who doesn’t deserve my respect. I don’t expect anyone to follow me, but there are those who appreciate my contributions here on both the left and the right. I don’t want followers here. It’s a goddamned LOL site! How silly is that! I’d rather have friends here than followers.

                        • >blockquote>I’d rather have friends here than followers.
                          And at least you know who those people are.. The rest can take a flying f*ck at the moon.

                        • Maxwell Supreme Socialist Presidictator of PK says:

                          So that’s how the moon got all those craters… *snickers*

                        • That big, low class, slimey crater? That’s guest.

                        • guest says:

                          Why is it that conservatives are the only ones on here who aren’t allowed to stoop to a lower level. I made a joke based on a Patton quote and I was summarily called a piece of dog sh!t, a racist fvcktard, told to eat sh!t and die, not to mention all the previous times I was called a douche, douche bag, etc. It’s a double standard when I can’t talk about what I believe in without being called names, but then when I say something disparaging towards people I disagree with that wasn’t even my own words then people go off on me for not being tolerant. Rando is the most intolerant person on this site and he degrades people that he disagrees with on a regular basis. If you want to get on to someone for not being tolerant you might want to talk to him.

                        • guest says:

                          Anyone can say they like the theory of communism, but don’t think it would work. There are at least two of you in this thread. It doesn’t matter what you say, what matters is what you support. If you support programs that move us incrementally towards communism because you like the idea of communism then you are supporting the rise of communism in the U.S.

                          Don’t tell me the Cold War is over or that communism is dead. You will have to convince the Russians that the Cold War is over first. There was a cafe in Moscow that opened called the Anti-Soviet Cafe (translated), the government stepped in and made them change their name to the Soviet Cafe. There are reporters killed on the streets there for trying to report on the corruption in the government there. Putin stepped down, but he still runs the country and he isn’t a big fan of the U.S. If he doesn’t run the country, then why does he sit at the head of the table?

                          Even if you don’t take Russia into consideration communism is alive and well today and it’s ideals are being spread in this country by the same people who were protesting the Vietnam War in the 60’s. They figured out that they can make a bigger difference inside the system rather than outside. So they became professors and politicians. One to mold the minds of new generations and one to mold the policies of this country.

                          Most of them would never openly embrace communism, although there are some now who will, they will condemn it in word and silently move the policies in that direction. It isn’t anything new and anyone who denies it is happening is either very naive or they are trying to cover it up. If you read the Communist Manifesto and the tenets then you will be able to recognize the programs that are pushing us towards communism and be able to oppose them.

                        • justacanuck says:

                          Sorry, guest, but I’ve reread your posts several times and there is nothing there to indicate you were joking. Everyone else just called it like you wrote it…..

                        • You notice that I never go off on froo, or Eddie, or diss, and only rarely get nasty with JAC? It’s because they’re not ignorant sheep like you do. When you say something, I know it’s going to be stupid. When they say something, I’ll actually pay attention. Very often I won’t agree, but I’ll pay attention. Republidrones like you, n00bs, & jim who all guzzle the kool-aid while bathing in it don’t get my respect. As a passionate liberal, there aren’t many conservatives I even like. But there are some here that I look past political differences for.
                          And FTR, when you start calling an entire race of people something nasty, that’s racism. And that isn’t gonna fly here without getting ripped into. Boohoo.

                      • RandotheLame says:

                        Rando’s a repugnant ass- get used to it.

                        • HelOnWheels says:

                          Ahahahahaa!! LMAO! Oh, pathetic little troll. Are you butthurt that Rando made you look pretty much like an ignorant idiot? So, your only solutions, because your arguments are weak, uniformed, and hold no water is to stalk him, with your sad little name, and resort to name-calling? The fact that you must resort to that only proves that your arguments are useless. *pats troll’s head* Move along now.

                        • guest says:

                          Rando has already been name-calling so your argument is invalid. Also, you resorted to name-calling before you could even make your point, so your argument is not only invalid it’s also an indictment against yourself.

                          That’s the first post I have seen from RandotheLame so I don’t know why you would say he has already been made to look ignorant.

                        • HelOnWheels says:

                          RandoLame = sock. And I wasn’t arguing. I -was- specifically name calling. But not because I’m butthurt, like Lame, because I’m being a troll right back at Lame.

                          Shaq is holding an panda. YOUR argument is invalid.

                        • Stalker trolls are awesome. This makes me so HAPPY! But your insults are kinda lame. C’mon, insult me some more! You can do better!

              • guest says:

                Oh, and we are still there to help them rebuild their country. It’s the same thing we have done in every country we blew up in a war. We’re still in Germany and Japan and that war was over half a century ago. If you want to complain about a long war try Korea. That war is still technically going since they only signed a cease-fire agreement and North Korea recently rejected it.

                • viking gal says:

                  A large portion of the government did NOT want to rebuild Germany and Japan. (my mother remembers listening to the arguments on the radio). But lesson learned from how we treated Germany after WWI prevailed, thank goodness!
                  We did NOT rebuild Afghanistan after our fight there with Russia. OK, that wasn’t a declared war, but it was real to the Afghanis!

                • Default User says:

                  I’m confused now. Are you saying we should leave now, just drop everything and get out or we should stay and help them rebuild the country?

                  Before you ask, I was never in favor of going into Iraq in the first place but I have never been in favor of abandoning the country after the mess we made there.

                  • TheOne says:

                    As for Afghanistan, I say we declare victory and gtfo of there!
                    And leave it for the French to clean up ( like they did to us with Korea and Vietnam)

                    • Default User says:

                      Really? Because that’s where the Taliban likes to make it’s home. That was the war the general populace was in favor of after 9/11. That was where we thought Bin Laden was. It seemed like a good idea to attack them. We weren’t doing to badly in Afghanistan before we went into Iraq but once we started Iraq we forgot about Afghanistan and the Taliban started creeping back out of their caves. If you want to stop the terrorist threat and protect our borders then you should be going after them. Not Iraq.

                      • Honestly, I was totally in favor of whooping ass in Afghanistan in 2001. Like most Americans I wanted to see Bin Laden brought to justice. I hated the Taliban (still do). I was actually totally with Bush until the Iraq thing. Then it was like “Wait…I thought we were after Bin Laden?” It was all downhill from there. Honestly, I’m not really sure what we’re fighting for there this time. I’m a little disappointed in Obama pushing that battle. I know we can’t just leave Iraq, but I’m also not happy with his exit strategy there either.

                      • guest says:

                        72% of Americans supported the war in Iraq when it started. So the general populace was also in favor of that war. Many of them got squeamish when they realized it wouldn’t be like Desert Storm where we just went in, kicked their butts and left. It is a big sacrifice we have made to stay and try to stabilize Iraq so that we won’t have to keep going back.

                        • viking gal says:

                          I was totally for going into Afghanistan, and finishing the job. That was where the training camps were, and the locals did NOT like the Taliban…which is why most who could afford to, got the heck out of the country.
                          I was against going into Iraq from the very beginning. I hated Saddam Hussein’s actions and beliefs, but I didn’t think the justification was sufficient for the probable expense in lives and money (still don’t). And it distracted us from finishing properly in Afghanistan. And unlike many, I do remember the ridiculous claim that the oil revenue from Iraq would pay for the reconstruction. Yeah, right…

              • jim says:

                Saddam had the 5th largest army in the world as I recall. And Mission accomplished had been put up by the crew on that ship because their mission – to oust Saddam – had been accomplished. It was their banner. Something I thought about years later was the fact that Bush landed a jet on a carrier, which says alot about his intelligence – that he knows how to fly a jet – and that he was able to land a jet on a carrier, a difficult thing that few pilots ever qualify to do. GWB was a remarkable man. Iraq, if it makes it, will be a fitting monument to GWB. I havent forgotten the faces of the people holding their hands up in the air with the stained finger which showed they had been able to vote. It was a great moment.

          • Just to counter some the things you ranted about, while it’s true that the things you listed make America look bad, it isn’t the sum total of what America stands for. Let’s consider the fact that whenever there has been a disaster, regardless of the magnitude, it’s always America that steps in and tries to help out. We send teams of doctors, flight upon flight of supplies, and the average citizen ponies up money to help support the effort. It’s ok to highlight some of the more notable f*ck ups, but can we strike a balance with the humanitarian efforts the country puts forth? I can well imagine you could count on one hand the number of countries that have stepped up when American had a disaster. I would like to see what the response would be if just once America didn’t lend any type of support. In other words, Rando, we’re damned if we do and damned if we don’t.

            • You noticed that too?

              • Default User says:

                The speccti makes a good point. Where were all the other countries when Katrina hit?

                • Mina says:

                  That was when I decided to stop sending any type of aid (financial or otherwise) to other countries with natural disastors, is when I looked around after Katrina and the only volunteers were from the US. I’ll be glad to help out my fellow countrymen, but the rest of the world can kiss my rear end.

                  • Well, I do know that Canada and Australia sent help and I can imagine the UK did as well. I don’t know about any other countries though.

                    • viking gal says:

                      There is a HUGE long list of the countries that offered help after Katrina. The USA refused most of their offers. I found the list on wikipedia, and posted it a few months back. I’m sick today, so look it up for yourself.

                    • Mina says:

                      Send help as in throw money at the situation or did volunteers come in? About 90% of the volunteers I met were from the Mid-west. Sorry to be ranting about this, but it’s a hot button with me.

                      • Danbala says:

                        Volunteers who aren’t invited usually don’t go. Many countries seem to get slightly jittery about having foreigners come in and help if not specifically asked.

                        • viking gal says:

                          I know that a few countries loaded up ships with volunteers and materials…even a couple cruise ships. But they were told ‘forget it, we can handle this ourselves’. NOT one of our finest hours. Even if we hadn’t needed the help, it was churlish to refuse in that manner. We could have said ‘can you wait until we see what we really need?’

                        • Mina says:

                          About the cruise ships, there was at least one that was used, and from what I understand of the conditions on board, a person would have been better off in the Superdome or on the streets of NO. A big part of the problem with New Orleans in particular was that there was only minimal effort to evacuate people and those who chose to stay were not help liable for that decision. Many of us preferred the more recent philosophy- “Leave, because there will be no emergency services for at least 72 hours after the fact. If you don’t leave, at least have the decency to write your SSN on your arm so we can identify your remains.” Harsh, but it’s what some of those people needed to hear.

                        • viking gal says:

                          I gather that many of those who did not leave were indeed foolish. But some of them didn’t have the money or the vehicle to get out. And the NO government was f-ing blind to people outside of their own social/financial class, and did not create the contingencies for those folk to escape.
                          It reminds me of my own doctor’s office yesterday afternoon. “You should go to the family health center in Wilmington. They will see you.” Uh huh. I’ve got a fever, I live by myself, and the neighbors who I could call on to drive me 30 minutes to that center and wait with me for an hour or two are elderly…and one of them is a repeat heart patient. (I’m contagious right now). When I pointed all of this out, the receptionist’s response was ‘Oh.’ (fortunately, the doc herself isn’t an idiot)

                        • Default User says:

                          Oh dear, you really doing bad. /adds in some chicken soup and a bottle of NyQuil to the previous offering of cookies, milk, and vicodin

                        • Mina says:

                          @ VG- Yeah, most of us were pretty ticked when we found out that the city waited until the last minute to even try to get people out. I mean by using school buses, city buses, and whatever else they had. That was the biggest problem, but at least the current gov. has learned from past mistakes. The last big storm to hit, things were handled much better.

                        • How come you can say vicodin and I can’t?! WTF?!

                        • Retarded. Somewhere in my name brand opioid rant I got flagged.

                          LAME PK, LAME!

                        • viking gal says:

                          @Default user. Thanks for the soup! I’ve got a bit of appetite back this morning, and that hits the spot.

                        • Default User says:

                          I’m pretty sure I spelled vicodin wrong so it’s not getting flagged.

                  • Danbala says:

                    There’s an interesting Wikipedia page (yes, yes, I know Wikipedia isn’t the best truthsayer, but a place to start, at least) on offered international aid after Katrina.

                    • Mina says:

                      I suppose I shouldn’t generalize like that. I wasn’t in New Orleans, I was a little (a very little) further north. Every single person I met that had come to help was a US citizen. I don’t know who was in NO at the time.

                      • viking gal says:

                        Now admitted my Danish cousins are anti-Bush, but they were horrified at the refusal of aid…including trained disaster specialists.
                        It seems like Walmart was the only US organization with a clue in that situation…

                        • Mina says:

                          A lot of the refusal of aid was initiated by the idiot governor we had at the time. I’m so glad I got the chance to tell that woman exactly what I think of her. It was so worth losing that job. And honestly, we probably wouldn’t have needed much if any help had the levee not broken. Until that happened, NO wasn’t the worst hit area, not by a long shot. If you were to talk to just about anyone who lived in LA at the time, they would get a little frothy about Blanco and her epic fail of a term.

                        • viking gal says:

                          I’m sure the blame goes around pretty far. It takes a large number of idiots to get a mess that big. I think the NO mayor should have been sent out on his butt by the voters, also. Not to mention the idiots who reorganized FEMA, taking away the input of the locals as to what disasters they thought were most likely to happen… And our congresspeople over the past 2 or 3 decades who refused to fund an improvement of the levee system…
                          For what it is worth, my college has been sending kids to the general area for ‘alternative spring break’ every year. I can’t go–allergic to mold–or I would have my crowbar and power drill ready.

                        • Mina says:

                          I think there are several colleges that have similar programs, and they are doing a lot for the city. Now it’s a matter of getting the locals involved again. Most are just tired of hearing about it. Many left as soon as they could get out and haven’t been back since. And I totally understand about the mold allergy- I have the same problem. I haven’t been brave enough to step foot in New Orleans since the flood because if it.

                        • Default User says:

                          My mom is a member of CERT(community emergency response team) and was actually supposed to go to NO right after Katrina to help with the relief effort and she had to get a number of shots before going including something for mold and fungus (not really sure exactly what). She spent a bit of time getting prepared but at the last minute the group she was going with was told they weren’t needed.

                      • Danbala says:

                        I’d imagine that those people who came from other countries probably worked in separate teams. It’d cause more of a mess than help, I imagine, having people working together who can’t communicate in anything but rudimentary sign language, or so.

                • keithybabes says:

                  Strewth. Isn’t America big enough to look after itself? Anyway Britain spent millions sending food aid to victims of Katrina in the form of NATO ration packs. And some of it spent weeks sitting in warehouses while the FDA tried to establish whether it was ‘fit for consumption’. Ungrateful bastards.

            • I never said we didn’t do good things. Of course we do. But this war is a ginormous black eye on our reputation, and showing a little remorse wouldn’t hurt us.

              • Let just say that one reason why America is looked upon unfavorably to the rest of the world has a lot to do with the perception that the leaders in America project. Other countries see a lot of bickering and back-biting going on, and immediately seize upon the argument that appeals to them the most. I’m not saying that I necessarily support the war in Iraq, but it doesn’t look good that after the fact our own people in Congress start running the effort down – even after they voted to go in.

                • keithybabes says:

                  I don’t know about that. Bickering is normal in a democracy, as is a free press (ish..). Since the morality of invading Iraq was definitely a bit of a grey area it’s hardly surprising that all the allies had internal conflicts over it, or that the press stoked it up.

                  • No, I think you missed my point. The bickering is normal, but it’s the back-biting after approving the invasion that caused a lot of strife.

                    • keithybabes says:

                      Well if it’s any consolation the bickering in UK continued to the final withdrawal, and still continues over Afghanistan. It’s annoying and embarrassing for the government but the opposition is there to hold them to account and to make sure that whatever is done is done for the right reasons.

                    • It also didn’t help how the media chose to portray a lot of what was going on at the time.

        • Jane St.Clair says:

          Oh look, the paranoid half truth and innuendo truck is here! Will a quarter get me an email chain about Obama being a Muslim? Will 50 cents get me a Kenyan birth certificate?

  6. ajohnson153 says:

    I can’t tell who in this picture looks presidential wearing a red tie. Clinton and Obama are in the way so I can’t see who else is wearing a red tie.

  7. Captain Wow says:

    Two out of three of the men wearing a red tie in this picture actually possess a neck.

  8. dontyouknow says:

    Ok, I’m stumped, which two look presidential?

  9. lowly grunt says:

    Hmmm…. seems PK can only sustain “funny” for a short while and them it’s back to crap.

    Although, to be fair, this crap is just out there kinda weird. It’s puzzling crap; I don’t know what the person who crapped it ate.

  10. slaggingham says:

    Somewhere out there, an aging hippie is fapping.

    That’s the only explanation for how unfunny stuff like this makes the front page.

    • lowly grunt says:

      “…an aging hippy is fapping….”

      What?

      The only mental image I can come up with is someone who needs Fixodent or more substantial undergarments.

    • The Steve says:

      Hippies hate Clinton by the way. Get it straight.

      He was very anti-drug, specifically against cannabis, and many of his crappy policies are still in place today.

      • lowly grunt says:

        Is that because he didn’t inhale?

        • The Steve says:

          I don’t think anyone would describe Clinton as “honest” when it comes to his social activities….

          Seriously, I know weed was probably cheap back then but everybody inhales, that’s the whole freakin point.

          That’s like saying “I tried alcohol once, but I didn’t swallow.”

          *insert jokes about spitting/swallowing here*

          • dissimilitude says:

            I’ve always suspected the truth was “Well, I tried to inhale and I hit it too hard, they tell me, because I ended up coughing until I puked on the guy who passed it to me….it put me off it completely, to be quite honest.”

  11. Whoosh says:

    PEELZ.

  12. thegoof529 says:

    and 2 out of 3 of these men have ruined the country

  13. cgray says:

    Affirmative Action Boy looks like he’s calling for a taxi–but none of them ever seem to stop.

  14. TheOne says:

    The guy in the back looks like Flounder from Animal House. And still more presidential looking than the other two !

  15. Cowlifornia says:

    hmm, too bad we can’t use the red tie to identify the president who will destroy a country….

  16. jim says:

    This really is a lol! Clinton looks like a goof.

  17. TheOne says:

    Where’s “Run ‘em down ” Joe Biden ?

  18. VictoryNotVengeance says:

    I don’t get it. I see a man with a red and white striped tie, a man with a red and white checkered tie, and a man with a maroon tie. And I see seven men. Is it saying if they were to wear a red tie? Cause the sude in the square chin and the hat could rock a tie. Is this a LOL?

  19. InTheFace! says:

    and the 3rd guy looks like Tommy Boy

  20. You know who looks presidential wearing a red tie?

    Your mom!

    OOOOOH.. sick burn.

  21. *walks over and takes a look at charro’s eyes.”

    Ok missy, I think you’ve had more than enough.. want to put the bag away now?

  22. Frank says:

    So who’s the black guy?

  23. Michael Swaim says:

    Just for this I’m voting for “Fat guy in a red tie” for 2012!

  24. Bob Noxious says:

    I can’t tell if the guy in the back with the hat on as a red tie on also.

  25. Champagne and Gunsmoke says:

    I don’t see it. Where are the Presidential ones?

  26. Rob says:

    Yeah, there are 2. They’re on the left there….

  27. The Lord, Thy God says:

    …and it is not the perjurer, nor the animal on the right…


Your comment

 

 

Search

Get Daily Lol News Emails


EmailSubscribe
Enter your email address:
 

TwitterFollow us
on Twitter »
FacebookBecome a
Facebook fan »
RSSRSS Feed »
  • Recent Comments

    dissimilitude on WOOPS
    dissimilitude on Let’s imagine the look o…
    Raptor007 on Get of your
    n10bettes on WOOPS
    AC on WOOPS
    mabsba on Let’s imagine the look o…
    shortright the ivani… on TRAIN ORIGAMI
    mabsba on TRAIN ORIGAMI
    I want to beat EWAda… on TRAIN ORIGAMI
    Rattus on WOOPS
  • Tag Cloud

  • The National Archives

  • Most Popular Pictures

  • RSS Cheezburger Network Blog

  • Even More Lulz