Show Only: Democrats | Republicans | Media | Military
« Previous Breaking News | STEPHEN COLBERT Next »
Seeing people outside the top few income brackets as worth treating like humans: exactly the right kind of change.
(Barack Obama)
picture: dunno source, via our Breaking News builder. lol caption: Jane94
 | RS on Am I Doing This Right? |
 | Herman the German on How Far We Haven’t … |
 | MrsQ of Philly on Go Sieg Heil Yourself |
| MrsQ of Philly on Keeping the Internet Hone… |
 | neoritter on Keeping the Internet Hone… |
 | Geary on Keeping the Internet Hone… |
| Geary on Go Sieg Heil Yourself |
| Geary on Ballistic Marshmallows |
| neoritter on Keeping the Internet Hone… |
| Geary on Extreme Redecorating |
Cheezburger Company Blog
I Can Has Cheezburger? Home - Lolcats n Funny Pictures 
I Has A Hotdog - Loldogs n Cute Puppies 
Just Capshunz - All of the Internet. Captioned
Animal Videos - Cute and Hilarious Animal Videos
Animal Gifs - Cute and Hilarious Animal Gifs
Daily Squee - So cute your brain might explode. 
Historic LOLs - Captioned Portraits of Yore
My Food Looks Funny - Funny Food Photos
So Much Pun - Visual Puns and Jokes
ROFLrazzi - Lol Celebs and All That's Fab Funny in Showbiz 
Totally Looks Like - Stuff That Looks Like Other Stuff
Must Have Cute - See. Want. Must Have!
Where is the “lol” in this?
You don’t get it? It’s funny because Sarah Palin is dumb! Ha ha! Oh, such rapier wit, Jane94!
This site went from funny-Obama-loving-lols to not-funny-at-all-Obama-worshiping-lols. Meh.
Second.
Third. Bleh.
Theis Liberal agrees.
*This*
I just assumed it was some kind of German slang.
Indeed, when I shake someone’s hand I at least look him in the eyes.
Hear, hear! Oblahblah’s not worth this kind of adulation!
since the cop is on duty, perhaps obama didn’t want to make a noticible thing about shaking the guy’s hand and getting him reprimanded. a handshake on the low down is a darn sight better than being totally ignored.
Watch the video dofus = Obama had eye-contact before this screen capture of the COP smiling
agree…
Agreed.
-
As a self-described liberal conservative who opposes abortion, supports gun rights, despises the TSA, and voted for Obama, I would like to pose the following question:
-
WTF ARE TEH LOLZ???????!!!?!?!?!11511515111!onefiveone
Haha, I think you and I would get along really well. Except I voted for Obama in the primaries, voted for someone no one’s heard of in the general election, and support Obama now. I might be even more schizophrenic than you, haha.
Reading the comment on this made my eyes hurt. The sentence structure is extremely poor.
… and yet he doesn’t see babies as worthy of being treated as humans. ironic.
He sees babies as being worthy of treated as humans… Unless you’re using some sort of bizarre definition of babies which includes people who haven’t yet been born.
But then if you use that definition, you must really hate Bush and the right wing for treating unborn future generations so badly by refusing to sign up to Kyoto or any form of environmental moveent.
Not signing Kyoto is about the only smart thing Bush did.
clinton signed the kyoto protocal, and bush rejected it
Actually, Al Gore was the one who signed Kyoto- Clinton was smart enough not to hang his name on Kyoto, too. He knew it was a stinker of a treaty back in the 90s.
But that was symbolic. What actually matters for treaties is the Senate vote on ratification, and that never happened. All Bush did was tell the world what everyone in DC already knew- that Kyoto would never be ratified.
Seriously, that one wasn’t Bush’s fault…. and the guy screwed up enough stuff that there’s no need to make up additional things to blame on him.
Or who have been born after a botched abortion. Damn those screw ups that lead to babies.
As Obama said re that bill, it was *already* illegal to kill babies born during a botched abortion. Therefor, there was no need to saddle Illinois with the rest of the bad things in it.
He was playing word games. Yes, it’s illegal to *kill* a baby born as the result of a botched abortion. It was not, however, illegal to withhold life-sustaining treatment and *allow* the baby to die. That’s what the bill would have prevented.
You do know that babies survive outside of the womb as early as 21 weeks in utero, right? Since that’s possible, does that mean it’s half a human at birth, since it was only half-baked?
With the way technology’s going, I don’t see how it’s not an utter impossibility that babies will gestate outside of the womb, eventually. Then what? How to define what’s technically “alive” and worthy of being treated as “human.”
Biologically, that question’s settled — at fertilization, the fused cells have a complete set of human genetic material and will eventually develop into a mature human with the necessary external support, but no other external “stimuli”, per se.
Now, when pregnancy begins, or when the organism is first granted human rights, that’s a different question.
The problem is that science is advancing at a much faster pace than the legal system can handle.
Funny how the net number of abortions always drops when there’s a Democrat in office.
Correlation does not equal causation. Just saying.
The body of evidence seems to suggest (again, this is under Clinton, not under all democratic presidents) that there *is* a correlation between higher wages for the middle class and increased access to family planning, and a lowering of abortion rates. All of this was true under Clinton.
Just saying.
I call shenanigans (and echo parksj1). Got a source for that?
Agreed. It was true under Clinton, but I’ve never heard it was true under Carter. It’s too soon to see if it’ll be true under Obama.
Yes, he likes to kill babies. He runs around stabbing babies in the heart. He’s the Annie Wilkes of 2009.
Watch the actual video of the event, then it will make more sense.
Have I got news for you.
One of the finest satirical shows ever.
It is a picture from a video, where Barack shakes this guard’s hand and Gordon brown leave the guard hanging right after.
The point is, Obama shook the guys hand. When the guy stuck his hand out, Gordon Brown just walked away.
It’s funny because everybody’s mooning over the guy like he’s the second coming of Christ. Like no other President has ever shaken the hand of a cop/security guard/regular guy before.
they havent
Citation?
I didn’t get one this morning, my radar jammer must have worked.
translation: you made it up and can’t prove it.
He’s not the one that made the first comment, you twat.
*snort*
Note that it’s a black constable. Just sayin’.
they have. calm down its not a big deal.
there are REAL changes that need to be made, and where the REALLY COUNT they arent being made..
sarcasm on the internet doesnt work
to drunk to remember that
mooning? i think you mean swooning. Mooning is showing someone your butt (usually pressed up against a window or hanging out of said window). Swooning is the fawning, sycophantic, love affair that the mass media tries to perpetuate that the 52% of the country that is still giving him a positive rating for the job hes doing is a wave of support.
Oh! There’s one! *Readies cage*
Ackshully, “mooning”, when used as a verb means:
9. to act or wander abstractedly or listlessly: You’ve been mooning about all day.
10. to sentimentalize or remember nostalgically: He spent the day mooning about his lost love.
11. to gaze dreamily or sentimentally at something or someone: They sat there mooning into each other’s eyes.
12. Slang. to expose one’s buttocks suddenly and publicly as a prank or gesture of disrespect.
Whilst you’re completely right, this whole conversation is funnier when you accidentally take the first “n” out of “mooning”
This conversation is funnier then the picture…
Which is typical for PK.
PK has pictures?! Who knew?!
I was briefed on this event but I wasn’t told this was actually being used. I feel our intelligence agency has deceived me.
I’ll start working on a statement blaming faulty intelligence immediately, sir. I hope the head of the CIA isn’t a friend of yours, they’ll be calling for his resignation by dinner.
In that case, we had best send a Best Regards but You’re Still Screwed card.
Sir, the Intelligence Agency has no intelligence to speak of and were unaware that this event was, or is, taking place. However if you would like to interrogate the fibbies, I spotted a few of them laughing over a box of donuts and a picture of Obama with an umbrella.. Clearly not only are THEY compromised but their sense of humour as well.
I recommend Gizmo. Not Gitmo, Gizmo.
Very well, I’m convinced. Consider it your personal obligation to get to the bottom of this mess by any means necessary that doesn’t require effort on my part.
*gets laxatives, car battery with jumper cables, mayo, and three midgets*
*salutes*
I will get to the bottom of this, sir.
Goddess-speed, Vice President. *salutes*
Just remember to tell the grand jury that Fibbies tried to assist with sabotage against the Libbies, and perhaps even suggest that they demanded our administration pay a million dollars cash from “Project Democracy” funds raised from the sale of U.S. arms to Iran – in order to destroy the Fibby fundy installations.
Thank you for the input, Pitty.
Two words, Mr. President. Plausible deniability. We were never here.
*is already not here like a good President and wondering where his torture minion assistance is in the dungeon*
Torture Minion? Is that in an official capacity? Because I’d LOVE to have a nice Gov’mint Pension to look forward to…
Publicly, Ivan is my personal assistant and thus that is his official title on the books with penision in the end.
Realistically, my dear Ivan, you are my torture minion.
Thank you sir, I won’t let you down. Say, do I get a special Torture Minion suit?
OMG it just hit me….I’m your Karl Rove!!
You’re his ball and Cheney!
Yes, Ivan, you have a special suit. Go pick it up and wear it with pride.
I suspect your morals set you above Karl Rove. We just torture people.
Actually, ‘mooning’ was legitimately used in this context- the older, original definition of ‘mooning’ means to behave wistfully, generally acting in a sentimental fashion. Look it up.
No, no. elefump said “mooning over”. That’s like this:
*gazes romantically with Bambi eyes and flirtatious little smile*
“Mooning’s is something different altogether, and goes like this:
*flips up skirt to reveal nekkid bue-tocks*
`
Please be absolutely sure you understand the distinction before you try either, to avoid creating problems in your young life.
But you can use them together in a sentence! “Alex’s friends were teasing him because he was mooning over Meredith, therefore Alex is presently mooning them.”
You should see the whole thing. Gordon Brown followed Obama and didn’t shake the guy’s hand even when he offered it. Pretty stark difference between the two.
Someone could have used that, not this photo that doesn’t really show the whole incident properly at all :/
The reason so man people treat the man like he’s the 2nd coming of Christ… is that after 8 years of George Bush, he comparatively is the 2nd coming of Christ.
Compared to Bush… ANY intelligent president would be treated like the 2nd coming.
This LOL is so funny I’m rolling on the floor…..
Need to change the name of this page to “fail lol’s”
The people voting on the LOLs disagree with you.
Looks like you’ve lost the vote. Again.
that’s because they’re a bunch of damn morons this isn’t even a joke its just pointless ass-kissing he hasn’t even done anything yet
what hasn’t he done so far? slaughtered the english language by being misunderestimated? thrown up on the lap of a japanese dignitary? (oops, sorry that was shrub sr)
but here’s a handy factiod for you:
The First 100
A presidential term lasts 1,460 days, so what’s so important about the first 100? Ask Franklin D. Roosevelt, America’s 32nd president. His legacy is built on those 100 days.
When President Roosevelt took office in 1933, the U.S. was in the middle of the Great Depression: the stock market had crashed and thousands of people were out of work. Almost overnight, rich people became poor and poor people became homeless.
Immediately upon taking office, Roosevelt set the U.S. on a 100-day course to recovery.
In those 100 days, Roosevelt (AKA: FDR) introduced dozens of new policies reforming banking and industry. The U.S. economy did eventually recover and these early sweeping changes became part of FDR’s legacy. Hard times called for drastic action, he said, and he would do it in 100 days.
That big round number stuck, and every president since has been analyzed, criticized, lionized or demonized on the basis of that early period.
(did your superhero measure up to that?)
Go learn history moron. The ecomomy was in the shitter for 10 years even after FDR’s BS. The ONLY thing that hot us out was WWII. Period. Liberal socialist policies had nothing to do with it, but they were great at helping cause the depression of the 70′s.
Wrong, and stupid to boot. How could government spending on a war get us out of a hole government spending on crucial infrastructure couldn’t? That isn’t even logical.
A depression or recession means negative GDP. GDP started growing as soon as FDR implemented his socialist policies. It stopped growing in 1937, when it had reached previous levels and Republicans convinced FDR to back off his socialist policies. It started growing again when they were reimplemented. Anyone can look at the historical record and see the truth.
By the time Perl Harbor rolled around, the economy was back where it would have been had the recession never happened. Not only did FDR’s socialist policies fix the Depression, they caused the economy to grow faster than any free market, capitalist policies ever have.
I have to ask, but are you ignorant? Or just delusional?
FDR took the worst depression in history, and resurrected it. The “Let the market fix itself” strategies of Hoover and Coolidge did nothing but make the problem worse.
In before political trolls.
Yep, this “lol” could be an epic troll collection site… How many can I see already? *starts counting* We could keep them in little cages and sell their acidic bile for drain cleaner…
Step1. Vote for unfunny lol.
Step3. Wait for trolls to appear and whine.
Step4…. Step4… Does anyone know the best way to catch trolls without being bitten and catching rabies?
The trolls ate step 2…. Honestly, they did…
I’m pretty sure it was the underpants gnomes actually.
Wow.
And I was just wondering what was funny about the caption.
Use a shotgun.
If your response was to foomanchu instead of AC, I think it would have been funnier.
Which number is the step where we all make a lot of money?
That’s Phase 3:
Phase 1: Collect Underpants
Phase 2: ?
Phase 3: Profit!
This is the Obama Idolatry Blog now.
has been for a while actually… about 8 months IIRC.
I find it odd that 98% of the comments about Obama LOLz are “This sucks” “This isn’t funny” “Obama is not idol worthy” and yet they keep making it to the front page.
If ^we^ all think they suck, the who the hell is voting for them?!
*then
Satan. Obama is the Anti Christ, you didn’t know. In a time of turmoil, disease, and starvation one will rise up and lead the people out of their problems, only to be know as the Anti-Christ. Haven’t you seen the Left Behind series…. Obama totally has that look!!!!
That’s WHY I voted for him, duh.
Dat’s right, my brother! Come The Rapture, we’ll have the Earth to ourselves! What a party that will be!
Ahh…good times.
that’s what you think. what will really happen will be all the rapture believers standing around with their jaws on the ground asking why not them, they were loud in telling everyone how to be a good christian and how to live their livers. then they’ll start pointing fingers at the rest of us saying it’s all our fault, if we only would have believed like they did they would have been raptured up to heaven. then they’ll throw their good book in the trash and start acting really mean….
When the Rapture comes, make sure you’re not standing under the ceiling fan.
Everytime time I hear or see the word “Rapture”; I immediately hear Debbie Harry singing/rapping “Rapture” -thanks an effing lot people, now I will have that song stuck in my ead for the rest of the night
nursie’s reference to Blondie’s “rapture” plus bad fairie’s “live their livers” has me imagining the rapture believers staying up really late, doing a lot of drugs and alcohol, while listening to new wave music… Maybe I need to get outside for a walk?
Just means we will be able to open fire like a damn gun line when they start pointing fingers.
…
What? I figure after Rapture is the best time to say hell with diplomacy and bust a few caps in their asses. Might as well before they shoot us, hell, I already know a number of people I will need to dodge bullets from.
Pointless diversion:
I grew up in the Pentecostal tradition. Their version of the endtimes goes like this:
1) The Rapture happens.
2) Satan gets to run the world for 7 years.
3) Jesus gets to run the world for 1000 years.
4) Finally, the Earth is closed for business and all remaining humans go to their final reward.
The funny part is that you’re allowed to join the good guys any time prior to step (4). I always figured (since I was taught that the end of days would happen in my lifetime) I’d just wait for the Rapture, and then I’d know for sure I was wrong and I could get my ticket to Heaven then, instead of trying to act like I believe something that sounds like a load… um, I mean, sounds unlikely, now.
Wow, sign me up before step 4…
That’s how I interpreted it.
So really, for the best course of action, sign up between steps 2 & 3. You get to stay alive if you make Satan think you’re on his side! Then when Jesus shows up, you can be all “I wasn’t REALLY on his side! I just wanted to be here for…for…your big welcome party! Yeah, that’s it! Hosanna! Hos- what? Those christians I executed? Um…they…um…they were talking smack about you Jesus! I took them down in YOUR name.”
You don’t even have to make up the story. Just say, “I’m sorry” and you’ll be bathed in the Blood of the Lamb! Which ought to really piss him off, since it’s his blood and all…
Even better!
Charro, you know that old saying, “It isn’t who you know. But who you blow..”
Are you suggesting we need to blow the voters to keep this crap off the front page?
*goes to the vote page and waits to be stopped*
If there’s a Torture Minion, it only stands to reason that there must also be a Blowjob Minion.
I approve of this idea but Charro is my Vice President, unless I missed something.
I will appoint an itteh bitteh kitteh committeh to investigate, unless Tessie is willing to volunteer.
Agreed.
Requesting permission to help interview Blowjob Minions! It’s a sacrifice, but I like to go the extra mile for my Lord and President.
Good thinking, I expect you to do a lot of interviews and medical screening. I don’t think I need to describe the horrors you will endure if I get faulty assistance.
Eat a healthy diet and get to work!
I’m willing to roll up my sleeves and (heh) pitch in, but to really do this properly, there needs to be two divisions: The Ministry of Blowing and The Ministry of Being Blown. Seems to me that would create at least two new jobs.
The second sounds like being paid to get privileges and we can’t have that. However, I am in favor of having a Ministry of Felatio and a Ministry of Cunniligus.
We need to take care of both sides.
The best policy stimulates many packages.
In bed…
*rimshot*
*rimjob*
Seth can be in charges of rimjobs.
It’s a dirty job, but …
I guess that really depends on how recent his last bath was.
And to think Broon gave him an epic blank.
I don’t get it … its either written with really bad english or the sentence isn’t properly formed …
“Seeing people outside the top few income brackets as worth treating like humans”
Is it supposed to red:
“Seeing people outside of the top few income brackets and treating them like humans” ?
No matter how I try and read that last part of the sentence it just doesn’t make sense to me(however explanations are welcome).
However I do understand the general theme of the caption and image (which I saw in the paper quite a while back and loved!), its merely the pre-teen linguistics I’m struggling with.
I think this is one for the Engrish site tbh!
Were you able to figure out what the humorous part is?
just about … however that doesn’t excuse the editorial.
Or me can have about write like this! and no one doesnt understand no problem.
No, it’s: “Considering people outside the top few income brackets to be worth treating like humans.”
It isn’t funny, but I think the sentence structure is correct, albeit rather clumsy.
Ah now that makes sense, but ye even thats a bit of a clumsy sentence … requires reading a couple of times to get it.
It still requires the ‘of’ as well really, and some tidying up, so:
“Considering those outside of the top few income brackets as humans.”
That’s my next progression in the hunt for a sentence that works.
and even then this policeman is hardly going to be in the bottom bracket of earners … so its still a bit of a rubbish caption to an awesome photo.
From memory, the cop’ll be on about national average earnings; Greedy Gordon would get about 5 times that much, not including “expenses”.
Sweet, is that the brits nick name for Gordon brown?
Is your avatar the cover for NIN’s “Fixed” album? It sure looks like it.
And Jane94 still took three tries to get to this one..
I’m afraid this has been done by our previous president. Remember the fireman after 9-11? I remember many more.
Frankly no, but that’s not important right now. What would be important (and be honest with yourself about when/where Dubya shook the fireman’s hand) would be whether or not Dubya was actually just passing the place where the fireman was working, rather than at an organised press “presedent meets our heroes” photo-op.
But this cop is outside 10 Downing Street (the British equivalent of the White House), it’s not like Oblahblah had to go very far afield to find him either… and I’ll bet if he were white, Oblahblah wouldn’t have bothered to shake his hand!
On todays episode we will be observing the “Racist troll.”
Now these common species of troll are famous for their attempts to blame others as the “true bigots” through the use of inverted logic and other such weak deceptions.
But for those of you watching at home, remember they are a fairly harmless creature.
Their poor intelligence and weak verbal skills, which allows them to think such mocking as “Oblahblah” are some how clever, means that simply ignoring them will leave them with a false sense of accomplishment and they’ll return, peacefully, to the bridge or small cave that they inhabit.
Now audience, if we look down, we’ll see the troll’s sad attempt at verbal communications, lets watch.
and dear audience watch as the countertrolls, troll the trolls. its quite a sight to watch the cycle perpetuate over and over.
Surely you’re not suggesting a counter-troll-troll!!!
It took a national tragedy to bring out Shrubs “Common Man” altruism. Nice.
Not so true. Here’s a huggly bush shot. Actually, there are lots of them
He was a very gropey man… As the german prime minster and attest to.
*Can*
She was merely citing a specific time. Every politician in history has shaken hands with those in lower earning brackets. Ya know the whole ‘getting the votes’ thing? Shaking hands, kissing babies? Its just that this jane94 as well as the media are fawning over President Obama like he is their lord and savior. And don’t you recall that no one liked Bush in the media, so obviously they aren’t going to take ‘sentimental’ pictures of him shaking hands with a lesser mortal, that might make him look, *gasp*, like a human being!
[link]
Bush preferred to regard those below him as, you know, furniture…
except the fireman actually did something
While I can’t say I find the caption particularly humorous, neither can I find the negative comments appropriately proportionate. He may not be the only president to shake the hand of a working person, he certainly seems to espouse egalitarianism to a greater degree than the previous regime.
So, a positive change, which (if one allows) brings a smile, often the precursor to a laugh. Ergo, not a fail. Lighten’ up, y’all.
Okay even if what you say was true, any smile and or laugh, would not be from humor, and this is a humor site. Laughing and smiling over a sentimental picture of Obama shaking hands with someone, while silly, could belong on an Obama fawning blog, not with humor.
FAIL.
Yeah, because I’m sure Bush NEVER shook hands with someone like that… and I’m sure Bush gave them the discourtesy of looking at them when he did it, unlike Obama. FAIL.
Joys of living in the nation where he did this; we saw it in video, and this still is of him moving off having shaken the policeman’s hand.
Making negative comments based on a single still from an unscripted videobyte – Epic FAIL!!
Making an assumption based on a single still might be a fail, though I would disagree with the epic part, but making the assumption because he routinely has exhibited elitist tendencies? Sorry, no fail for that.
Obama did it through respect, Bush did it cause an advisor told him to.
Like anyone could even know that, Napoleon.
fail.
Napoleon?
Hasabrain is apparently intending to take over Europe. Who knew?
MMmm… Napoleon.
*nom nom nom*
I think you are thinking of Neopolitan.
Well, Neopolitan is ok, but there’s a nom-able Napoleon as well — it’s a puff-pastry thing with a cream filling.
OOh. I want some. My last boss, I nicknamed Napoleon because he was short and a complete doosh. I woulda kicked him in the shins before I left but I was afraid assault may stop them from giving me my severance and I EARNED that severance goddamnit!
orrr it’s a quote from Napoleon Dynamite…
Umm…doesn’t a respectful handshake require eye contact?
Yeah, because otherwise you might miss and grab something else…
Yet Obama still cannot make eye contact with lesser mortals, for he is mightier than thou.
It’s a courtesy, as the blinding light from his gaze lights mortal flesh afire.
He can’t take his eyes off the teleprompter.
No one can take their eyes off the teleprompter.
I can, but then.. uh.. uh.. I would.. uh.. forget what the.. uh.. next word.. uh.. is..
-
See?
It’s pretty damn fine. Smooth smoked glass…long shiny pole…oooh…
Ooooooooooooooh, you said shiny. That got MY attention.. being a Republican and all (yes, I know I.N.O.)
-
Still.. shiny!
In before the ranting about the unfunny and OMGishness Obama ish teh rock! of the lol!
Damn, late again.
So are you a dollar short too? *snicker*
*takes your damn dollar*
Liberal money! MINE MINE MINE!!! *runs*
I’m rich! I’m independently Weathly! Woo hoo!
Not for long.. I’m sure Barry will hear about it and take it off you.
This officially belongs on the failblog because it’s neither funny, nor particularly good.
I think the lol comes in the next shot which would be when our Great Leader (the not-voted for PM) Gordon Brown walks right past the police officer totally ignoring his outstretched hand.
Kind of highlights the differences really.
But I heard that British people were naturally stand-offish?
Some study said that a couple of Brits talking touched each other less than any other nationality group. (By the way, the Puerto Ricans got the most, I think, with somewhere in the 11-somethings for a nearly-eight minute conversation.)
But no, blowing the guy off isn’t that nice at all.
Jane94, this just shows your ignorant, hypocritical lust for that slimeball of a toilet stain. Since the dawn of the TV age, all Presidents have shaken hands with people when they could. The media has made a point of showing what they want you to see to support whom they want. I don’t support George Bush, as he had the 6 biggest budgets in the history of the United States. That is until slobbering lustful idiots voted for Obama, thinking he was going to pay their mortgages.
By the way, when you actually care about the hand you are shaking, you face that person, and look them in the eye.
Another one! *Goes to find more troll cages*
Er – a troll is someone who posts inflammatory material (‘bait’) specifically intended to insult people in order to draw up a flamewar. In this case, Justacarolinian may have taken the bait, but he/she is not the troll. The person who captioned the picture could arguably be called the troll, but that would require that the ‘bait’ be intentionally crafted to trigger indignant reactions instead of just being starry-eyed crap.
tl;dr You keep using that word. I do not think it means what you think it means.
Hmmm, that actually makes sense…. BURN THE WITCH!
what’d i do? don’t burn the witch, it hurts and it takes forever to revive the frog familiars and the kitties don’t like the smell of singed hair.
Sorry, it’s just that I considered their insults (“hypocritical,” “toilet stain,” “slimeball”) inflammatory, nasty and childish… Apart from that, I suppose you’re right about them not really being a troll…
hmm… how about “angry person with troll-leaning rhetoric”
So instead of a cage, we just send them to DWN’s “Oval Office” *ahem*, for rehabilitation? Or put them in the stockade?
Stockade, visiting my office is a privilege not a punishment…
That’s why I put it in quotes.. subterfuge and misdirection my liege.
But the stockade it is!
Find one for yourself. Pointing out the bias of some slobbering Obamaton is not trolling. Obama is a toilet stain on the history of the United States of America, who got himself elected by playing the Messiah card to race baiters, and playing the race card against anyone who didn’t support him. And he has said one thing, then done another, therefore a hypocrite.
Anyone that thinks Obama’s vision of America has anything to do with freedom or our founding fathers ideals is a fool. They need to read the Constitution.
Anyone thinking that Obama is a Christian, and turns their head at abortion needs to read their Bible. Abortion is murder for the sake of fornication. This is America, if you want to fornicate, do so, but don’t murder a human just so you don’t have to face responsibility.
And don’t fling that troll poop about Christians aren’t allowed to talk about the bad deeds of others. We are allowed to speak about the lies of those in charge, even charged with standing up with doing the right thing and praying for our government.
Religious or not, we all should do everything in honesty. And I don’t see it from either party, and certainly from the current administration.
Personally, I’m real sick of left leaning loud mouths who ranted and raved, screaming with their hair on fire every time Bush farted, but loving adore when Obama poops on the hood of their car.
Obama can’t legislate abortion laws just because he’s Christian. That’s why we have separation of church and state. My understanding of the speech was him calling for maturity in the debate and non violence. Um, isn’t that Christian? Or should we go back to the Crusades where we kill people for not thinking Christian?
This is interesting… LINK!
What did I tell you about bringing logic into a debate?
But a quiz on Facebook told me I am Spock. Isn’t Facebook the end all be all of quizzes?!
Murder is murder. And he promotes it. Seperation of church and state is a liberal lie. There is an amendment about not making an official state religion, but not one forbiding a person of faith making decisions on that faith.
And you seem to miss the part about we are free to do as we will in America, just as long as it doesn’t interfere with the rights of others. No where have I condoned forcing religion of any type on anyone. But that is the usual liberal baiting whenever someone of faith speaks.
As far as the Obamasiah calling for maturity and non violence, it’s easy to say that when you can have the press call out anyone that doesn’t agree with you as not mature. And if that doesn’t work, fling a few bombs at an aspirin factory to distract everyone. Ooops, wrong liberal. But I bet he will do it with Afghanistan when necessary.
Any fool who believes Obama should have to sit down and watch Hitler’s speeches during the 1930′s. It’s damn scary how alike the two are. Nazi was the American word, shortening the German word for National Socialist.
I am not angry, but I hate the hypocritical liberals who ran screaming with their hair on fire with Bush, but say NOTHING with Obama.
And yes, if Obama was a real Christian, he would be Christ like, which is what the word means, from the church in Thessalonica. John the Baptist lept in Elizabeth’s womb when Mary said she was pregnant. Abortion is murder, religious or not.
As someone whose baby just died, I think abortion is a nasty, awful thing. That being said, I don’t like the idea of it being illegal either. I hate abortion, and could never do it. But then again, I’m not a woman so I’ll never have to either.
Pro-Choice then? That’s pretty much my stand. I don’t like abortion, but then I’m not the one that can be a moral judge. Just because *I* don’t think it’s right, doesn’t make me right.
I have yet to meet anybody who seriously Likes abortion…
Hmm, ok, that was the wrong word. Support?
Pro-life is one of my Neo-con stances that I won’t give up under any circumstances. I was too close to that for it not to be an emotional issue for me.
No, dude, you can not like it and still support it.
Every serious supporter I know, hates abortion. Hell, Lynn and I actually considered it but we thought it out and did some soul searching and now Mikey is four years old. It wouldn’t have been the right choice but it being a choice made all the difference. We got to decide to be parents instead of being forced.
And I can’t imagine a world without Mikey’s impish ways. However, I realize that there are circumstances where it would have been the right choice but that makes it no less nausea inducing to consider.
Are you a moral judge when you put some one in jail for murder? No. Murder is murder, period. And worse than that, they want to kill the ones that survive the first attempt to kill them. And the Obammasiah was in the forefront of that cause.
I bet you don’t think so “non judging” when you see Bernie Madof ripping of thousands.
Honestly, cites will help here. There are documented votes on this subject, and they back you up. It might be worth your while to go ahead and list those votes to let people who don’t agree with your stance of abortion being murder see how it wasn’t just abortion that was being advocated.
Thanks frofrou. While I understand giving references, this is not something that anyone who has an honest answer should need references too. An honest thinking person should check something like this out for themselves.
The best cite I can think of is logic. You are free to do whatsoever you wish, in this imperfect system, so long as you do not interfere with the rights of others.
“The reason we accepted Darwinisim even without proof is that we didn’t want God to interfere with our sexual mores.”
Have all the sexual relations you want. But the same logic that says to convict a killer says to raise any children from said relations. Don’t interfere with that human’s rights to life.
I can agree with you, but it’s a fallacy of logic to assume that just because you’ve made a statement that it’s up to everyone else to prove that statement. I agree with you. I know the cases you’re talking about. But what I’m saying is that your post would me more meaningful if you can give secular people what they need to hear with fact NOT based on Biblical or moral law. The votes from the Illinois Senate are very clear. All it would take is a cite to prove your point and disallow anyone from arguing with you on a moral/Biblical standpoint.
-
Take a page out of Paul’s book. His letters were geared in different ways to speak to people as they needed to be spoken to. You can’t force-feed a baby steak; they aren’t ready for it. You must first give them milk. Cite the milk
Froo, you are correct. There is a time for milk, and then sometimes you just have to lay it like it is. Jesus didn’t hand out the milk glasses at the temple.
So I say this, Lord Obamasiah’s record is just that, public record. he doesn’t hide it, he dances around it while saying exactly what he stands for. And this issue is more than Obama’s voting record. I speak out about the senseless killing of the Jews in WWII, but the estimated 8 million killed there is NOTHING compared to the genocide here.
You can’t speak as though everyone sees it as a genocide. Honestly, people do think of the unborn child as a parasitic mass of cells that saps the strength of the mother as it grows. Your point of view is that it is a child. The two opinions do not mesh up, and the only way to truly show how you feel is to back it up. Especially in a forum such as this, where pro-life, Christian right-wingers are sorely outnumbered. Just stating over and over again that “the record is public, now go find it” is not the way to influence people here. Trust me
You’ll be thought of as simply a mind-numbed troll until you can bring your sources to the table.
@ froo – had to grin at the parasite bit – i believe i used that one on annie. i allowed her to get to me that day
but i found it very telling that she never once asked what i meant by using that particular description… she just got a bit more irrational.
you do have an excellent point that i wish more people got: non-christians (or at least the ones i know) want facts to base their opinions on, not biblical platitudes or being told that we just have to have faith. for us (as a generalizaton) that just doesn’t hold water. and if we have a different belief structure and threats of eternal damnation, etc are used as a reason to believe in your bible – that isn’t going to work very well either. for many, the bible is a book, written by men, from the oral history of a group of people that few living today have anything in common with.
for a spot of humor that explains this much better than anything i could say check the link – not to change your mind on anything by any means, just a different viewpoint is all
no, ‘an honest thinking person’ wants to know where you specifically get your information from.
and blogs don’t count as a source since they are an opinion, if a blog cites a source, check it out, don’t just accept that if it’s in writing by someone you agree with that it must be 100% right.
source?: “The reason we accepted Darwinisim even without proof is that we didn’t want God to interfere with our sexual mores.”
have you personally, actually read any of darwin’s work? not extracts, and not pamphlets handed out by your church, but his actual books?
Fairie, Obama’s record is both public and common knowledge. I don’t see the gain in posting a link to something that is to easy to find yourself, and something a responsible voter should know. It’s that simple. Not some pamphlet I got from church.
As it was getting on late in the night, (for me) I forgot to attribute that quote. It is from Julian Huxley, and I didn’t learn about it at Bible study. Sorry to disapoint you.
And yes. I have read some of Darwin’s works. And the modern anti religious crowd is worse than the religious for mis quoting Darwin.
Yes, you are a moral judge when you send someone to jail for murder.
Taking a life is taking a life. Societal, cultural and religious morals dictate whether it is right or wrong. Over time, human beings (particularly Western Society) have decided that killing other people is wrong (even though we still have Capital Punishment, extenuating circumstances, etc.). Taking a life in and of itself is not wrong, it is how the prevailing societal, religious, or cultural mores view it that makes it wrong. So yes, when you are putting someone away for murder you are being a moral judge. In our society, in this day and age, taking a human life is morally wrong.
Then apply that to a helpless human child.
And you must be messed up in the head to think that killing another human is not wrong.
I am not an advocate for capital punishment either, having been falsely accused of a crime, and spending nearly 2 years defending myself.
And I do see a difference where it is kill or die yourself. Protecting yourself against someone violating your life is different than murder.
I have not stated my position on abortion in this thread. Nor did I say I think killing people isn’t wrong, I merely stated that it is not the act that is wrong, it is how society views it that makes it wrong.
For the first several thousand years of our existence, killing other human beings was not wrong. We cannot say what the next few thousand years will decide about killing other people.
A man marrying a twelve year old in and of itself is not wrong, it is how society views the marriage that makes it wrong. Historically, marriages were made between older men (older meaning over the age of 18), yet nowadays it is viewed as an incorrect behaviour. Societal mores have changed.
Killing a deer and eating it in and of itself is not wrong, it is *prevailing* societal views that make it wrong. Currently, prevailing society does not view this as wrong, but there are those that do. Who is to say that 100 years from now the thought of killing a deer won’t be repugnant to the vast majority of society and a crime punishable by time served in prison?
Killing a humpback whale and eating in and of itself is not wrong, it is how society views it that makes it wrong. Yet, a humpback whale is a mammal just like a deer. And our society says killing humpback whale and eating them is wrong.
I am positing, logically, that acts and deeds in and of themselves are not wrong. It is the society, culture or religion that makes them wrong. We legislate based on what society thinks is right or wrong. Once the law is the law, if you choose to disobey, you choose to suffer the consequences of having societies morals imposed upon you as law.
I have merely stated facts in a logical manner that have elicited an emotional response from you, and forced you to put words in my mouth.
Charro, I actually had that discussion with my parents when they found out I had a belly ring. My mother said it wasn’t right to have one. I said why not, I wasn’t showing it off. If it were the cultural norm to have tattoos on my face, I’m sure I’d have tattoos on my face and they wouldn’t blink. It really made Mom think, and she is now talking about getting her own ears pierced another two or three times. 5 years ago that would have been akin to skinning a child alive
Ah the old tradition of flaying a child. Memories.
Nah, I’m kidding.
I’m glad you see where I am coming from, I’m not trying to say killing is right or wrong, it’s just there. It just is. It happens. Everywhere. It’s the people that make it right or wrong.
Considering that the Old Testament is ripe with stories of razing cities and taking the women as wife/slaves, I’d think that the moral ground for speaking on the matter is a little shaky.
-
And I need a new lampshade.
You can make a lovely lampshade by skinning a child.
I’m thinking a nice belt, too.
Perhaps some nice humpback whale shoes and a coat?
And a panda hat?
With a condor feather to top it off.
I can has DEET for perfume?
Only if I can have dolphin for dinner. I can haz dolphincheezburger?
Link for video:
See My Vest
Burns: Some men hunt for sport,
Others hunt for food,
The only thing I’m hunting for,
Is an outfit that looks good…
See my vest, see my vest,
Made from real gorilla chest,
Feel this sweater, there’s no better,
Than authentic Irish setter.
See this hat, ’twas my cat,
My evening wear – vampire bat,
These white slippers are albino
African endangered rhino.
Grizzly bear underwear,
Turtles’ necks, I’ve got my share,
Beret of poodle, on my noodle
It shall rest,
Try my red robin suit,
It comes one breast or two,
See my vest, see my vest,
See my vest.
Like my loafers? Former gophers -
It was that or skin my chauffeurs,
But a greyhound fur tuxedo
Would be best,
So let’s prepare these dogs,
Mrs. Potts: Kill two for matching clogs,
Burns: See my vest, see my vest,
Oh please, won’t you see my vest.
The Wang mocks your bile and angst.
I WANT a wang: an uncommon want,
When every year and month sends forth a new wang,
Till, after cloying the gazettes with cant,
The age discovers he is not the true wang;
Of such as these I should not care to vaunt,
I ‘ll therefore take our ancient friend Don Wang-
We all have seen him, in the pantomime,
Sent to the wang somewhat ere his time.
Thr thing I have never onderstood was how one can claim to be serious about stopping abortion and not be working their little hearts out for better birth control. There should be groups as big as the National Cancer Society helping fund the science for better birth control, bake sales to help pay for it for ladies who can’t afford it, people working together to do whatever they can to make it possible for women to simply prevent getting pregnant if for any reason they don’t feel they should, and there is nothing of the sort. The self-proclaimed pro-lifers seem to be all about anger and condemnation and not at all about getting down to what in practical terms would actually cause there to be fewer abortions here in the real world. Do you agree with them about that, and if so can you explain to me how that makes sense to you?
My read is that some folk want women/girls to either have no sex at all, or to ‘pay for their sins’. There are a significant (but not overwhelming) portion of pro-life folks who are also anti-contraception. Which hails back to the bad old days of married women not being able to avoid pregnancy, even if they knew that another child would literally kill them…
Oh, and link behind my name…
that hurts! the mental pain of young women (and men too ) going back to that way of thinking. and to bring up breast feeding as an abortifact because it can mess with the cycles…. again, one more time where once a child is in this world and breathing on its own, it has to fend for itself. it reminds me of wild animals where the males will kill the young (especially sired by a different male) just so they can breed with a female with a reproductive track record. for animals, it works, but isn’t this where being self aware and being able to think for ones self comes into play?
next thing you know, they’ll be pushing rape victims asked for it and boys will be boys all over again.
the more things change, the more they stay the same i guess.
Yaaaaaa, I never will understand people wanting to hate women. Who doesn’t love mom and who doesn’t have appreciation for teh bewbies!
Hell, even if we are going to go the sex object route, it would be logical to treat the sex object with a bit of reverance so that it can be maintained. Or was I the only boy who was told that if I broke something it was tough shit and I don’t get another one?
Disclaimer for the dim: DWN does not advocate making women into sexual objects against their will. DWN loves teh wimmins and wishes them nothing but happiness and smiles. Happy women give better head as they put more passion into it, duh.
“the more things change, the more they stay the same i guess.”
With the exception that nowadays, pregnancy isn’t the only possible consequence of sex. Witness the opposition to the HPV vaccine and the Pope saying that condoms don’t prevent the transmission of HIV. Now boys AND girls can drop dead if they have sex. Yay?
Wait there’s opposition to the HPV vaccine?
Yeah, some people think it will make girls more likely to have sex, and therefor it’s a bad thing to them.
Right cause cervical cancer is a good punishment for having sex.
Wait let me elaborate. Up until a few years ago, no one even KNEW that HPV led to cervical cancer (some HPV, I know). Girls were having sex back then! This is like that stupid condom debate. If we teach kids about safe sex, they’ll have sex! Oh god stop the children from having sex! I bet if there were an AIDS vaccine people would oppose that too.
Speaking of, does anyone know or have any opinions on the relative safety of the HPV vaccine? I know the FDA approved it, but then they’ve approved other stuff before and then a few years down the road had to go “Ooops. Sorry. I guess that killed some people. Our bad…”
One of my daughters is considering it but she’s concerned about the lack of a track record as it’s only been out a few years.
“The Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System (VAERS) is collaboration between CDC and the FDA. VAERS is a national system that accepts and monitors reports of possible side effects, or adverse events, following vaccination. VAERS serves as an early warning system for problems that may be related to a vaccine. It is important to know that reports of adverse events after immunization are not conclusive proof that the adverse event was caused by a vaccine. Some of the adverse events reported to VAERS may occur by chance following vaccination.”
“How many VAERS reports related to HPV vaccination have been received?
As of June 30, 2008 VAERS has received a total of 9,749 reports of potential adverse events following HPV vaccination. Ninety-four percent (94%) of these reports were about non-serious adverse events.
Six percent (6%) of adverse events reported for the HPV vaccine were considered serious, which is about half of the average number of serious reports for other vaccines. In comparison, the overall average in VAERS for any serious adverse event following vaccination ranges from 10% to 15%; therefore, the percentage of serious reports for Gardasil® is less than the overall average for other vaccines.
It is important to note that a report to VAERS does not mean there is a connection between the vaccine and the event. It means the event took place following vaccination.
VAERS data are routinely updated, and the number of reports and the type of adverse events will vary depending on the date of analysis. For the most up to date information about VAERS, please visit: {www.cdc.gov/vaccinesafety/vaers/gardasil.htm}”
[LINK] to full CDC text in name.
@ Charro: Thank you! I forwarded her the link. She’s 17, so I think it’s appropriate that it’s a decision she makes on her own after doing some research. (My take on it? Look, you get a tetanus booster regularly even if you don’t have plans to step on a rusty nail, right?)
Just last fall, they also figured out that 1/2 of all oral, throat, and esophageal cancers are also caused by HPV (the other 1/2 by tobacco/alcohol). So maybe we should be also vaccinating our boys? Because I hope that all of those head-loving males are giving, as well as receiving!
Your naivety regarding the workings of the world amuses me greatly, viking gal.
I may decide to ROFL if you respond to this with the appropriate level of righteous indignation…
@diss: Happy to help.
@viking gal: ohmai. That’s just.. dirty. I would think that they should be vaccinating boys and girls because it says it prevents x number of HPV strains that cause cervical cancer plus x number of other HPV strains. I can’t remember the number right now. Wouldn’t you want your little boy not getting those strains of HPV as well as your little girl?
But in light of the link between oral sex and oral cancers, just ohmai. I bet some parents would start the “If we vaccinate the little boys, we’ll be tacitly consenting to homosexual sex!”
I think the main reason it’s only recommended for young women at this point is that there haven’t been any studies done on safety & effectiveness in other age/sex groups. (From the CDC website Charro sent me to!)
@HST. I’m not that naive…I’m in the practice of modeling for young adults. And statements like that certainly do tend to get their attentions–so I have some hope for at least a small portion of the population!
@Diss. I think they haven’t tested it on young men simply because the discovery about oral/etc cancers literally was published last fall. But I imagine Merck will get right on it, since it could mean more profit! (and hopefully save a few more lives?)
Won’t someone thing of the young gay men!?
Meh. I’m just fu(king wit ya, anyway…
I’m a giver. I give and give and give.
Probably not Merck. Oh, wait, gay men have money–get to testing RIGHT NOW!!!
@ Charro: I would hope that giving & receiving oral sex isn’t limited to young gay men; if I recall correctly from my youth, the young straight men were very enthusiastic about it.
…or is the assumption here that the young straight men don’t have anything to worry about as their (female) partners will be vaccinated? Unless they start requiring it, I wouldn’t count on universal vaccination of young women, either.
“Gardasil and some vaccines in clinical trial are preventative, but drug companies such as MGI Pharma are studying therapeutic vaccines to treat those already infected with the virus. “We need to come up with better vaccines — and we need to study them in men,” says Haddad. Gardasil has not been tested against oral HPV, but Dr. Douglas Lowy, laboratory chief at the National Cancer Institute, says that there is every reason to think that, in principle, “the vaccine should be able to have an impact on oral cancers attributable to HPV.” Lowy says that the next studies might start with a look at the rate of acquisition of oral HPV in those who are vaccinated and those who aren’t.”
[LINK] to TIME article about this.
@diss: I said young gay men because of my earlier comment about homosexuality and if we vaccinate young boys then they think it’s ok to practice homosexual oral sex because it’s now “safe”.
But i sure HOPE today’s young straight men are as enthusiastic about oral sex as they were when I was a youngin. If oot, they definitely need more sex ed.
Sadly my intelligence is reduced to reading this thread as “Blah blah blah, get blown, blah blah blah, vaccine, blah blah blah, I hate needles, blah blah blah, I want head.”
Any similarity to idiots, living or dead, is purely coincidental.
@DWN I would have thought you would read it as ‘blah blah giving head blah blah vaccine”…?!?!
WTF
Vaccine to prevent the giving of head!
This is relevant to my interests… say it ain’t so!
I’m required to explain idiocy? This is crazy talk.
No, that’s my brother, Crazy Talk.
@charrot: About VAERS and HPV vaccines.
This will nest so far from the original post that it’s probably pointless, but I’m a noob, so….
Be careful how you interpret the CDC statements there. It’s not really saying what it seems to imply. The fact that 6% of the reported adverse events were serious (vs. an average of 10-15%) does not by itself mean that serious adverse events were less (or more) common than with other vaccines. It could just mean that fewer non-serious adverse events got reported, which may be likely for a vaccine routinely given to 12 year olds rather than 0-2 year olds like most others. I’m not saying the HPV vaccines are unsafe, just that the 6% factoid by itself doesn’t really mean much. Given the prevalence of HPV-linked cancers, I think anyone who is or may become sexually active is much safer getting the vaccine.
Oops. That was “@charro”, and swap “less” for “more” where appropriate.
Ok, some people. Not me. Abortion is murder. You want birth control, ok. Use it. Fine. It’s your life. But if pregnancy happens, care for that helpless human life.
How many times has a doctor had to make a choice of one life over the other? Many. I don’t speak about a woman trying to save her life, but rather, murder for the sake of fornication.
And I don’t agree with men who would dominate their wives and call it Christian, and speak against that too. The Bible says that a husband should nourish and cherish his wife like his own flesh. A Biblical husband should be a leader, not a taskmaster.
Ok, here’s a point for you to think about: What about the child who is the product of that Biblical husband and his 12 year old daughter? Or the child who is the product of the rape at the hands of a sadistic criminal? Or the child who is simply a mass of cells that will never progress beyond the blob stage and will continue to suck the life out of the mother as it grows? What then? Hypothetically speaking, of course.
A Biblical husband wouldn’t be having a child with his child. A child of rape is still a human being. And a miscarriage is just that.
If you have an ounce of honesty in you, you know there is a difference, and I am not speaking hypothetical.
As far as a child of rape, what about knowing your child would have issues or special needs? What then?
Good thing my autistic son has me, who will defend his life through HELL and highwater.
I did not say miscarriage. I said blob of cells. My brother in law’s cousin (yeah, friend of a friend and all that) had a pregnancy terminated because the child never got beyond the blob stage, even at close to 25 weeks. No brain development, no limb development, simply a blob that kept his wife in the hospital for days because of health issues.
-
I’m throwing hypotheticals at you because there is another side, and while I am vehemently opposed to it, I can at least empathize with it and see that I am not infallible in the matter, and have no business saying that someone is evil for doing what they (as their secular selves) believe is the right thing to do. That child of rape, while still a child, can be an albatross around the neck of the young girl who doesn’t know any better. The albatross can be made heavier by those unforgiving neo-con parents who, in the back of their minds, wonder if their child was “asking for it” and never really think of the child as a blessing, no matter what they say.
-
As far as having a child with special needs, I know what I would do, but I also understand that not everyone has the same moral conviction that I do about said special needs. Some look on it as a blessing for the child to never be born and have to suffer. Autism, in the grand scheme of things, is pretty mild considering other issues like Cystic Fibrosis, brain tumors, and other medical causes of death at an extremely early age.
-
There are two sides to every issue, and I urge you to consider the side of those not raised with a Higher Power or a Higher set of rules and morals to consider. A child raised not believing that abortion is wrong, for whatever reason she (or he) was raised in that belief, cannot be held to the fire by you for simply not knowing any better.
I know that it was hypothetical statements. But 25 week is still a baby that failed to carry. Miscarry.
And I don’t support Neo Con’s, by the way. Remember, it was the religious crowd that put Jesus on the cross. I don’t care for the crowd that thinks they are going to bring about the 2nd coming by electing Jesus president. There is a BIG difference between people who live a Christian life and those who are just religious. And zealots in every crowd.
And I understand what you are saying about the other side. It’s not just fire, but love of life.
Actually, a 25 week old fetus is NOT a miscarriage. 20 weeks is the cutoff between miscarriage and fetal death (not sure if that’s the technical term). My baby was born at 20.5 weeks, and despite the fact that some kept trying to call her a miscarriage, she was in fact a live birth who died 2 hours later. You’re not helping your pro-life stance when you don’t even have the facts. I wouldn’t get so bent out of shape over that except it’s been sort of a sore spot for me for the last 3 months.
And FTR, I totally agree with what you said about the difference between those living Christian lives and those who are just religious. Honestly, I think you nailed it. I know many religious people who I don’t think live Christian lives at all.
You would be angry at someone who murdered your mother, why not someone who killed a defenseless child?
You jump to birth control is lacking. Sex is something that carries a responsibility, period. It is a great, and quite enjoyable thing. But you have to use care with it too, which is what some refuse to do. That same crowd usually (not all) don’t want responsibility for the rest of their lives either. “Pay my mortgage, my healthcare. ect…..”
You are free to do what you want with your life, and yes, if you get in trouble, there are millions of people who want to help you. America is the most generous nation in this world.
But this crowd doesn’t want to earn their way, it’s easier to whine about others than do something about it. And that includes abortion. Sex with no worries. A pleasure mad, me, me, me, me, me, me world.
Oh, and there is already so much free birth control in America that it isn’t funny, yet we are one of the worst murderers in the world. Birth control doesn’t stop abortion.
Your view that women casually have abortions as a method of birth control is pretty outrageous. Abortions are expensive, physically painful, emotionally traumatizing, and socially frowned upon. Sex with no worries? Hardly. You have a very narrow view of the world.
He’s got a rather broad brush he’s painting with in this case. I mentioned the fact that abortions are not used for birth control except in a very small (as in almost non-existent) number of cases, and he glossed over that part.
After reading on, I see that he is a total crackpot. G’night all.
Froo, I did miss that part. Sorry, it must have been late. And there have been a TON of replies. I have read them all, but no human way possible that I can keep all of what everyone said 100% correct in my mind.
*Politely* May I ask for what other reason would they do it? We already covered the medical need, as I don’t classify that as abortion. (Not a choice I would want to make) There aren’t that many medical needs.
Having known a handful of women who have had abortions, not one of them had any other reasons why. Other than a medical reason, which is not what I adressed, what reason would a woman have for an abortion. As you point out, it’s not an easy thing on the person having it.
I think you have it backwards, it’s your view that is so narrow it only fits what you want to see.
and don’t forget all the hard to place children languishing in foster care…. why isn’t anyone protesting against that (not the foster system, but the lack of adoptive parents).
my bad, there was a huge movement against adopting – prop 8!
but seriously, it isn’t about fewer pregancies, it’s about control – only married people can have sex, but it doesn’t have to be with each other even though adultery is a sin, but evidentally not as bad?!? never did figure out how the rating system worked – to me if something was wrong, it’s wrong.
but back to the control – the rhetoric smacks of ‘keep ‘m barefoot ‘n pregnant’ and barely educated in anything other than the bible.but women should only know how to read enough to get comfort (brain washing?) from it, but she still needs a man to tell her what the harder parts mean. i guess tose would be all the parts that don’t describe what a dutiful wife is supposed to be like.
//rant over
//momentarily
Fairie, NO WHERE have I ever said anything about treating women that way, in fact, right the opposite. Personally, my wife is the greatest gift God ever gave me, outside of my salvation. My wife is more important than my children, they will leave home someday. She will be with me till one of us dies.
I do agree with you about adoption. It is something my wife and I have thought about, when the 5 we have now are grown and gone. Or at least the oldest ones.
And if you read enough of my posts, you will see that I personally choose to live by Christian standards, I have spoken out for the rights of those who do not.
I get REALLY passionate about abortion. It is the killing of a human life, period. Have all the sex you want, trust me, I do.
Do it with any consenting adult you want. But it has consequences. Should a child be conceived, at least give that child a chance to live. Babies are not that hard to get adopted.
I will stand up for your rights to do whatever you want, as long as your wants do not interfere with someone else’s.
Do me a favor, since you are so passionate about “dutiful wives,” please tell us the role of a dutiful husband. But if you base it on the Bible, use the Bible. That is something else I am passionate about.
Obama may, if he so chooses because of his Christian beliefs, sign legislation against abortion into law. Obama cannot make a law against abortion just because he is Christian, and is therefore “obligated” to do so. If you think Obama’s definition of “maturity” and “non violence” are different from yours and other Christians, you are certainly free to do so, as you have pointed out.
I still believe “non violence” is a concept Christians say they adhere to which would make Christian violence in the name of preventing abortion hypocritical.
Congress alone has the power to overturn Supreme Court Rulings, which they are free to do if the majority needed votes in favour based on their Christian, or other religious, or other moralistic, beliefs.
Roe v. Wade is still in effect.
Obama cannot make abortion illegal (secular), whether he is Christian, Muslim, Jew or Atheist (religion). He does not have that power (secular). End of discussion.
Not end of discussion. Obama makes the claim to be Christian, and is a public leader. As a Christian, we are obligated to deal honestly with this leader, and speak out when and if this leader is not behaving like Christ.
I have never promoted violence when dealing with abortion, so don’t put me in with that crowd. Just remember the lefto nuts that spike trees wanting loggers to get killed, or use violence against whalers, or fur wearing women. (Or don’t you consider acid thrown in the face violence?) There are people who claim to be part of many beliefs that don’t adhere, just like our president.
Congress can do those things, what part of both parties are dishonest did you not understand?
Prostutition is legal in Nevada. Doesn’t make it right. Do you think women should be caught in the trap of selling themselves? It may work for a few, but for most, it’s a life of misery.
And I never said Obama had the power to instantly, or otherwise make it legal. The toilet stain of a president we have has made a career of abortion and race baiting as the foundation of his political career. As far as Biblically obligated, then YES. If he claims Christ, he IS. Jesus himself said “If you love me, you will obey my comandments.”
You may say all you want he is not behaving like Christ. The Constitution of this country, however, does not grant him the power to simply make abortion illegal because he is Christian. He may be biblically obligated by your religion to do so, but he cannot.
Funny, he “claims” to be of the same religion. That is my point.
And you completely failed to read my post. He is not a toilet stain for not making a law, but rather that he has promoted it where ever he can get away with it.
And even if he can’t “make the law,” he chooses what he promotes and leads us in public. He can’t make global warming laws, can he? But he in out blasting people like it’s a sin to own an SUV. (I don’t)
You said he is biblically obligated, and as a follower of Christ must obey Christ’s Commandments one of which is Thou Shalt Not Kill (I assume this is the one to which you are referring).
Here, (if he is a Christian) his biblical duty is hindered by his Presidential limitations.
I read your post, I simply chose to reiterate, again, my original point. Christianity does not trump the Constitution of the United States of America, and in the U.S.A., the President cannot make a law just because he is a Christian.
Charro, I hate to break with you here, but I see Justa’s point. Obama perhaps cannot make a law banning abortion, but he can speak out against it, or at the very least, lead by example and not vote for or approve such legislation that crosses his desk. I think that’s what Justa is trying to say, in his own way.
-
For the record, Obama voted three times for infanticide, which is completely different (if you want to split hairs) than abortion. Not a pretty picture, secular or not.
I am simply reiterating my point. From reading what Justa was saying, it seemed that they were saying he is obligated as a Christian to stop abortion which he cannot. He is free to speak as he may, as is any American.
I didn’t read the wall of text from justacarolinian (I can’t take anyone seriously who uses “toilet stain” as a descriptor for a politician), but I would like to inject this note into the abortion debate.
Both Pro-Choice and Forced Pregnancy activists believe abortions are horrible, and both believe each one is a tragedy. The only difference is one side thinks you can reduce them by offering education and easy access to birth control, and the other believes you can reduce them by putting doctors in jail.
Forced Pregnancy. I like that.
Don’t they also believe you can reduce abortions by imprisoning the mother?
[LINK]
Here is an interesting bill, giving Child Protective Services in AZ the right to detain an expectant mother for being hooked on meth.
Since we’re off topic.
@ Charro: Wow. I’m kinda torn on that issue — while I recognize that subjecting a fetus to the mother’s drug addiction is a bad thing, it seems like a well-intentioned top to a veritable luge run of a slippery slope.
@diss: That’s how I felt too, there is an article in the AZ Daily Star about how some people felt is was preclude to preventing abortions, but the language didn’t get changed to not be interpreted that way.
We’re already taxing trans fats, are about to start taxing sugar, and tax the crap out of cigarettes, who’s to say that criminalization isn’t next?
You forgot LSD, mushrooms, PCP, ketamine, MDMA….
I agree. Let’s put all women in jail as soon as they become pregnant, for the good of the child.
PM: Did you know that fentanyl and its derivatives (which are given to patients after major surgery and to chronic pain patients) are 81-500 times more potent than heroin?
I had no idea! Of course, I’d never heard of them before your post, either…
@diss: So, let’s say you’re a meth addict, and you’re 18, and you just found out and you’re only a month pregnant.
Ok, since you’re an addict, pretend that you’re also in trouble with the law because you committed a crime to get your fix. Now, also pretend you tell your court ordered counselor you’re pregnant. Court ordered counselor calls CPS, because they are obligate to report abuse. CPS gets the sheriffs and a judge to lock you up because you’re a meth addict. By now, say you’re two months pregnant. You could still legally have an abortion, but hadn’t made the decision yet and are now being locked up and forced to have the child because they don’t want you doing meth. Hypothetical, and far-fetched with this senate bill, but it could happen.
And about the fentanyl.. yeah. That’s why people get addicted. It feels really really good. And heroin isn’t that potent.
No where have I criticized Obama for not making a law. It’s his stance to support laws that kill children. Including those who survive abortion the first go around.
And yes, ALL Christians are obligated to protect life.
Justa, Obama is free to speak as he pleases, this is America.
My understanding of Christianity is you are correct, they are obligated to protect life. And you are free to believe, as your religion tells you, that he is not being a good Christian.
Charro, there is no reply box on your comment. There is not a “brand” on Christianity. That is a man made invention. Yes, he is free to say what he wants, so am I. And when he claims to be a blue chevy when I can see he is a red ford, I call him on it.
Abortion is contrary to everything the Bible stands for. And that Bible is God. (St John 1:1) So is Jesus. (1:14)
What kind of nation would this be if we were not free to speak our minds about our politicians? Communist!
(Just find the nearest “reply” button up in the thread. It will cause the comments to post under the thread in the order they are posted. You don’t need a reply button directly on the comment you wish to reply to)
Yeah after a certain point, the nesting becomes nearly intolerable.
I don’t know if he is being a good Christian, because I am not a Christian. As I said, you a free to believe what your religion tells you, that he is not being a good Christian. You are also free to say so. I did not say, nor mean to insinuate, otherwise.
All life?
I bet Jesus called people toilet stains, too. What Insult Would Jesus Use?
Since indoor plumbing didn’t exist at the time, how about “out house stain?”
You have either not read the Bible, or purposely choose to narrow your view on it. There are a handfull of places where Jesus was pretty descriptive. Telling people that their father is the devil isn’t exactly polite. But then again, it there is a movement in this age where people think he was a hippy, promoting drunkeness and free love.
But I suppose you are above your own rules, as you were pretty nasty to me. Funny how your Jesus changes when it’s someone you want to insult.
@ Justacarolinian
anyone can make decisions based on their own faith, but no one is allowed to cross the line and make decisions for others based on their personal faith – you want to base your choices on your book, great, if having a set of written rules is what it takes for you to feel like an ethical person, but don’t expect everyone else to interprete your rules the same way you do, let alone even agree that your rule book is the be all and end all for everyone. and that same code of conduct applies even more to politicians.
how would you like it if someone started telling you how bad you were and you were going to their version of your christian hell if you didn’t follow their book of rules (the satanic bible as an example). offended much? well many of us are offended by the preaching/threats of damnation/name calling/etc for not being your brand of sheeple.
so you don’t force any type of religion on anyone? yet you speak just like those who do… nuts don’t fall far from trees…and people of a certain religious persuasion usually end up telling the rest of us how we’re in the wrong because we don’t follow your rules – white wash it all you want, but when was the last time you offered (unasked even) to pray for someone to find your christ? and when was the last time someone who wasn’t christian offered prayers that you’d find eternal salvation through their religion?
comparing obama to hitler is pathetic, invoking goodwin’s law to frighten people regarding our clearly elected leader (no hanging chads, no parents being in business with the company that makes voting machines, etc)…. next thing you’ll be calling people names that disagree with you, throw a temper tantrum, and then vow never to write another comment (which will last all of 15 minutes tops).
btw, i see a lot of jfk in obama, not the maniacal ravings of a psychopath bent on genocide. get your analogies straight if you want to score points.
and don’t quote your rule book either if you want to be taken seriously in the outside world. not impressive that you can repeat legends (of a culture that isn’t even yours)
Fairie, you missed this by 1000 miles. I didn’t quote my “rule book” about abortion. Common sense and logic. Killing is killing.
I have discussed that Obama claims to be of that same rule book, but doesn’t adhere to it.
I have never said people are wrong because they don’t follow “my rules.” I have repeatedly defended everyone’s right to do as they will, to pursue happiness for them. Right up to the point they interfere with some one else’s life or rights.
You making fun of my faith is just as bad as those who try to prostlyte into thier religion. Crtitcizing Obama’s faith, which he claims to be the same as mine is fair game.
As far as praying for others, I do that all the time. I pray for peace, I have prayed for salvation, but I force it on no one. And I respect those of other faith’s who pray for me. Even the agnostic who disagrees with me, but simply wishes me the best of luck. Praying for good will and blessings are who I am. And public expression of that is not forcing my ideas anymore than you singing your favorite song in public is.
If you and I engage in a conversation, and we point out different point’s of view, then we both decided to enter the arena of ideas, and thus it’s fair game.
And I do highly suggest you watch, not read, watch, some of Hitler’s speeches, preferably from before the war. (With captions) It is sadly shocking how much of what the two have said that are the same.
Also, you have never seen me vow to never write another comment. Get your analogies straight. And be sure to stop quoting your idea of rules to me, or I might brand you with something you can be brow beat with. Ooooops, no, that is what liberals do people of faith when they want to shut them up.
“I didn’t quote my “rule book” about abortion. Common sense and logic. Killing is killing.”
Including the death penalty and war, right?
Don’t forget self defense.
There is a huge difference for this Right Winger in the death penalty, killing in self-defense, and the murder of the unborn. In the first two cases, you’ve got *adults* who choose to perform an act that causes the harm of another. In the case of the fetus, it’s an innocent life that has done nothing wrong. As far as war is concerned, again, you have adults who have made the choice (albeit a rather stupid one) to kill each other for whatever reason. You can hold the leader accountable for the crimes, while it’s a squinchy matter to hold mindless drones to the fire for what they were told to do. Of course, if you have soldiers killing those who are not engaged in combat against them, i.e. women, children, and innocent collaterals, then you have a crime against the innocent again, and you’re back under the same umbrella that protects the innocent unborn. The soldier who kills the innocent should be held accountable for it.
I see your point froo, but all that serves to prove is that “killing is killing” is simply not true.
There are different levels of killing, like you just said.
You’ve got to watch the nomenclature in cases like that. Murder is different than killing, and so forth.
*sigh*
Justa didn’t say murder. Justa said “killing is killing”.
When you “kill” someone in self defense, are they any less dead? When a soldier “kills” an enemy combatant, are they any less dead?
If it’s a nomenclature fail, the fail is on Justa.
Oh, I know. I’m not disagreeing with you
I’m simply pointing out that the nomenclature is the important thing when trying to differentiate. Justa is trying too hard.
And let me clarify that I wasn’t using the word “you’ve” to mean you specifically, rather, I was using it in a general sense.
TOOOO SOOOOONNN!!!!!11!!!
@Charro,
Ok, I just got in from registering my son for early college high school, then a Chorus concert, and there are waaaaay to many comments to address them all. And one of yours said something about where I stand on war, and medical abortion and capital punishment. You did miss where I spoke about those, except war. And I have never spoken in favor of war. Though I recognize that there are times when it is unavoidable. Iraq doesn’t seem to be that to me.
Medical abortion is making a choice to save a life, and I stated that Doctors do that all the time. That is a peronal choice one has to make, and the motives behind it are different.
Maybe I can explain the difference like this also, killing and death are different. Killing is not justifiable. War, anger, or sex, or whatever. And I pointed out that *I* was falsely accused of a crime, and see how easy it is to convict an innocent man. It took me nearly 2 years to prove my innocence
My entire point about abortion, is the killing for the sole purpose of avoiding responsability. It is putting one’s personal wants over the rights of the unborn.
Portland Mark made some comment about just a few cells, but not one of us can prove when life begins. That includes me. But I know that clump of cells will prove itself to be human, if not interfered with.
And my beef with Obama is not “just” abortion, but also infanticide. Those of you crying for the innocent lost in war should also be crying for those lost to non medical abortion, if they are consistant. Those that would cry out to protect the eggs of some bird should be just as willing to cry out for the fetus.
I can’t answer every comment. I just don’t have time. But I’ve done my best. And Charo, thanks for the lively conversation! The difference between killing and self defense is easy. The predator brought death to themselves. An unborn human has done no such thing.
It’s such a touchy topic, that whole abortion thing. Losing a child (yeah, I’m bringing that out again) has changed my perspective a great deal on these things, especially considering how tiny my baby was. Morally, I have to agree with you 100% on abortion. I think it’s disgusting. From a practical and legal stand point I tend to waffle a bit though. Plus, if I went pro-life I’d lose my liberal badge. LOL
Justa, Portland Mark brought up war, not me. I informed him you are against Capital Punishment and I did say that “my rememberance” was you are against abortion for any reason even to save the life of the mom. I also said if you did say that was ok, I missed it and it was my bad.
I’m being nitpicky because I don’t like having words put in my mouth even though I know you said you didn’t have time to read the posts.
@ Charro, please forgive me if I was not specific enough about what was addressed to you, and to all the comments that I couldn’t hope to keep up with. It has been a rather long, but pleasant day. Let me re iterate *politely* that I did the best to address all the comments, and one specific issue you spoke of. While I try to read, in general, PK every day, I don’t have time to write on it every day. LOL, my poor cell phone is about to EXPLODE with all the reply emails!
Lets just mark the abortion debate up as I am passionate about abortion for non medical causes. I don’t see this as a right, as it inteferes with the right of the baby. What I believe morally and legally are 2 different things, to be addressed differently. This is America, have sex, drink what you want, be as smart or as dumb as you want. But don’t let your wants harm others. Nor should you expect the rest of us to pay for your stupidity. Some of this debate has been hashing over the use of certain words, when we all know those words have different meanings, depending on context.
Bottom line, do what you want, but let me do what I want, and don’t interfere with others, including the unborn.
And I know this will offend some, but I’m free to speak too. God Bless you all, I love you, and as the Bible says, if we disagree as far as east is to west, I am obligated to love you. But remember, it also says “as many as I love, I rebuke.” By the way, to make it easier, call me Waylon
While I support the death penalty in theory, I do find there is plenty to debate over it as humans are only humans and thus we must balance between the actually guilty and those we would kill that are not guilty.
Self defense as a nitpicking point is so stupid, I don’t even know where to begin. It is defending yourself against somebody trying to kill you. You or them, do or die, complete animal instincts. To even argue it is an exercise in arrogance. You want to lay down and die, that is your business but I will protect my family and myself from an overt threat and heaven help the one left in my hands once my adrenaline wears off and I can think of something truly awful.
The unborn have harmed nobody but they are also the province of the woman’s body. It is her choice to bring them into this world and nobody else’s. Nobody can truly grasp that situation from the outside and even those that have gone through it have enough doubts to fill a mansion with shit.
I have always stated that I believe abortion as a last resort. However, this is arrogant as it assumes that a majority of women make this decision lightly, even belittles them unintentionally. I can assure you that an overwhelming majority of those that consider abortion, let alone go through with it are haunted, even if it was for the best.
So why the hell are we bringing up self defense in an abortion discussion?
I brought it up because Justa said “killing is killing”, which clearly, “killing is killing” is not true. Societal and cultural mores and all that.
Though, DWN, your argument for self defense killing poses that age old question: what if continuing the babies life endangers the mother? Isn’t that self defense? I know you’re pro choice, I’m not attacking your argument, it just made the question surface in my head. Justa is for self defense killing but against abortion for any reason apparently. If I missed a part in his arguments that he is ok with abortion to save the mom, my bad totally; I’m not trying to put words in Justa’s mouth that is just my rememberance. I just don’t have the will to read through all the posts again right now.
Agreement on the self defense thing. And it was brought up to hash over me for saying that killing was wrong, and some tried to justify moving that line to abortion.
Well, even as prochoice, I still get a knot in my stomach just thinking about it. We were rather scared and the circumstances around Mikey’s conception really threw us and in fear, we almost made a very poor choice and it makes my guts go cold each time I think about it.
However, the existence of a choice made it possible to make the right choice so we cannot deny others that same choice.
But that side note aside, you are right, there is a case to be made about self defense for the mother. Those that would say the mother should die need to put themselves in front of a gun, that way they are making an equivalent choice.
It is a hard issue and children as sacred but so are women. Demanding an end to abortion is cutting your nose off to spite your face. Either way, you are causing death. Allowing abortion actually lowers the number of abortions overall.
Not to mention ending abortion leads to illegal, botched, unsanitary abortions that can end horribly for all involved..
I mean, drugs are illegal, and it’s been proven that they are bad for you, yet people still do them! Amazing how outlawing something doesn’t magically stop it. Keeping it legal keeps it regulated and safe(r).
Yeah, Froo, I’m familiar with the arguments. I just hate when people get their panties in a bunch over a few cells that haven’t even developed self awareness yet, and base that opinion on “Thou Shalt Not Kill!” Unless they are also against the death penalty and war; then I admit they are consistent, moral people who are more principled than I am.
On the subject of war, it should be noted that women, children, and pregnant mothers ALWAYS suffer during war. There has never been a war in history where that isn’t true. I personally can think of some times when that price must be paid anyway. Still, I think it should be couched that way: “My fellow Americans. Omar al Camel Driver is an evil, evil man, who wants our chickens for vile sexual practices. We figger it shouldn’t cost more than a trillion dollars, a few thousand American servicepeople, and the lives of a few hundred thousand women and children. Don’t worry, most of the people in the war area are brown skinned, not white, so it’s all cool.”
[link]
George Carlin is where I get my fascination with the “America hates Brown People” meme.
As a complete aside, Christopher Walken, while teh awsum, is a nut.
-
Proof: {http://www.esquire.com/features/what-ive-learned/christopher-walken-0609?src=rss}
Yeah, I like Walken.
I think he lost it filming The Deer Hunter..
“Killing is killing.”
But not all killing is murder.
“Seperation of church and state is a liberal lie. …
No where have I condoned forcing religion of any type on anyone.”
*sighs*
I love the smell of logic in the morning.
I’m sure you also oppose the death penalty, right?
Justa does oppose the Death Penalty, but not killing in self defense. Apparently, in that instance, “killing is killing” is not killing.
Well to be perfectly honest, I find it hard to mock or hold it against somebody for supporting that…
It is stupid to oppose people using survival instincts in a do or die situation. Or did I miss a memo of very pathetic cheap shots?
Come on people, there is plenty to hit Justa with, without attacking a brainlessly simple stance to be right about.
Or did I miss a sarcasm somewhere along the lines.
Not sarcasm, but I was being droll.
You’re forgiven because you have the executive wiggle.
*wiggles*
Kickass.
I find your opinions to be a toilet stain as well. That’s all I have to say about that.
Actually, that’s not true. But I’m stopping here anyway.
Hmm, you start out by assuming from one comment that you know what an complete stranger thinks, and then you want to be treated like someone who actually thinks? If you’re only spouting and not listening and thinking you are a troll, sweetie.
Which is fine with me, seems to me trolls do a public service by helping people learn to recognize those who will never actually think no matter what, so they don’t waste time trying. Go trolls!
So, how is the hate and false witnessing going on here glorifying the Lord and Savior? You have a moral point of view – good. Try sharing it in a way that doesn’t make you a sh*tstain.
God said himself that he hated certain things. If it’s good enough for him, then it’s good enough for me.
As a father of 5 beautiful children, this is a passionate issue for me. And the excuse for it is the worst.
There is no false witnessing here. Go flame someone that is afraid of you. The truth is the truth, and doesn’t care what people think about it.
You have to pick your moments, Justa. Don’t couch your statements in ire and hatred, as Jesus did no such thing. When the Temple was being abused, THEN He unleashed His anger, but not before then. He was all about peace, love, and hippie beads, and wasn’t the most confrontational person about putting forth what the Lord said.
-
Ease up on your approach, and remember that you’re outnumbered here. Even Paul wasn’t an ass when he knew it would get his butt kicked. And he’s the original ass of the New Testament.
*grumbles* not to mention the biggest ass of the New Testament.
Peter has a special place in the assh*le hall of fame, but Paul is the gatekeeper
I rather like Paul, though. He says it like he thinks it is.
See, I read my Bible, and it says that the we are the temple. And funny, I don’t find hippy beads anywhere in my Bible.
The temple is not the only place where he put the cards face up on the table, either. Don’t confuse sterness with anger.
And I want to thank you. Being compared to Paul is a great compliment to me. Why? Because he told the truth. Even when he got stoned for it. I preach the same Gospel he did. As best as my abilities allow.
Jesus wasn’t overly confrontational. The great thing about Salvation is that it’s a gift, and isn’t forced on anyone. Free Will is just that: God puts it out there, it’s up to us to take it. He didn’t force it down the throats of anyone.
-
And you’re deliberately mischaracterizing what I said about the Temple to make a point. I’m speaking literally. That’s the only time that Jesus truly lost His temper. The other times He simply told the Pharisees they were wrong, and showed them how by citing Old Testament law. Even Jesus knew the power of cites when outnumbered. It would behoove you to remember that.
-
And I’m not comparing you to Paul. Paul knew how to pick his battles.
I thank you for an honest, civil discussion. Something that seems rare here on PK.
But I have to still disagree with you. Jesus got violent at the temple, but he was blunt in many places. Such as when Mary Magdelene anointed his feet and washed them with her tears.
Also, when he stood face to face and told them “I and my father are one,” after they said “You make yourself God, being a man.”
This was throwing gas on the fire. Not milk and cookies.
And I’m not forcing anything on anyone. Not ONE time.
Being open and honest about my belief is not forcing. I commented about Obama claiming to be Christian, but not acting like one. Mainly with abortion, but by no way is that all.
And I chose this battle. Yes, religion or not, I will defend human life. Stating the truth is not confrontational. Sorry.
“That’s the only time that Jesus truly lost His temper.”
`
Didn’t He also kick the ass (??) of a fig tree?
To be perfectly fair and complete, you’ll note there’s not much in the Bible regarding Jesus’s teenage years. During which the phrase “You can’t tell me what to do, you’re not my REAL dad!” may have been heard once or twice. (“Honestly, we just don’t know what to DO with the boy. He won’t settle down and take carpentry seriously, he just wanders off and he talks about ideas all the time….”)
Walking on water at the school swim meet…
Turning water into beer at his Bar Mitzvah…
At least the liquor cabinet never got raided!
I can’t find the Family Guy clip where Jesus gets mad at Joseph and calls God asking “Hey Dad, can I come live with you for a while
As far as the hippie beads go, think about what Jesus specifically said about following him.
-
“Love the Lord your God with all your heart, mind, and spirit, and love your neighbor as yourself.”
-
These are the only specific commands Jesus gives about how to treat your fellow man, aside from leading by example and showing love and compassion to the sinners of the time. Jesus spoke more of love than he did of the law. This is something important to remember.
Love is corrective. Something Paul said. There are plenty of places where I do, and have shown compassion. I have commented here in the past on PK and other ICHACB sites, just not often.
And as I said earlier, we are the temple. And I will defend it.
The difference is that an unborn human cannot defend itself, just as an infant can’t.
I still don’t see hippy beads. Drugs and orgies have nothing to do with Love.
Love is 1000 things that there is not enough room to describe here. But it is certainly telling the truth. And abortion is plain and simple, murder for the sake of fornication. True medical needs is not abortion, if you are splitting hairs. The motive is all the difference.
At the present time, all pre-term artificial terminations of pregnancies are called abortions. There is no differentiation between medically necessary and murder for the sake of fornication. Until that distinction is made legally (and I have no idea how you will legislate intent), abortion due to medical reasons and abortion due to a “mistake” are the same thing.
Jesus knew how to party down.
-
The hippie beads are facetious, in that hippies were known for being peace-loving, war-hating, mellow sorts of dudes, and that completely describes the Jesus we see in about 95% of the Gospels. There are a few times He got stern, but He lost his temper only once. Being stern and being in your face are completely different things. He didn’t seek out fights, and He diffused them when possible. Remember the fight in the Garden? Peter wanted to go off on the Romans for daring to mess with the Lord, and sliced off the ear of one of the soldiers. What did Jesus do? Why, He calmed Peter down and replaced the “enemy’s” ear, because it wasn’t the time for fighting. The time for confrontation comes later. It’s all about leading by example, because we as Christians will not be able to change minds by beating people over the head.
-
And if you don’t think that Jesus was an enabler, I suggest you read the story of Cana one more time
Intent. Why do you need this medical procedure?
And he got angry more than once. He got violently angry once.
And he did go to certain places knowing it would set off certain people. I have done no such ear slicing. I have told some people things they don’t like. Your comparison with the Garden misses, as that was physical again.
Jesus plainly ticked off many people by telling them what was what.
And there is nothing wrong with a drink, we are even told to drink for our “often infirmities.” Just told not to be drunks. That is waaaaaay different than LSD and mushrooms and orgies.
Froo, I look forward to many more thought provoking conversations, but I am off to bed tonight. Thanks!
How well endowed, as it were?
Froo’s stocks are rising, in my book.
I’m sure you’ve done your part by adopting at LEAST one of the about
14,000 children taken from their 17 y/o negligent/crackhead/methmoms,
right?
RIGHT???
(dipshit)
ummm, since my house is paid for, what was in it for me to vote for obama (assuming i didnt vote against the old guy and the ‘sure am glad she isn’t my governor’)
Did you miss the part that Obama is the Anti Christ!? That’s what is in it for you, my friend.
Ummmmm, since I didn’t vote for the old guy either, I mean after all, a liberal is a liberal, Republican or Democrat, what did I get? Socialisim shoved down my throat?
I sure hope you didn’t vote for hope and change and hope and change and hope and change…..
You sure didn’t get it. If you have an ounce of honesty in you at all, look at the line of crooks he has appointed, the flip flops, and all the usual Washington garbage.
Other than, “I’m not an old white guy,” the only ting Obama promised was to pay mortgages and healthcare and ect….. And going back to my original post, that means you either fall into wanting something for nothing, or you voted for the black guy. Nothing wrong with being a person of color, as I am myself, but I don’t make myself God in being one. So you voted to get something for yourself, or for his race. Hope and change and change and hope and uhhhhh, oh where is my teleprompter? Oh yeah, they are backhanded ways of saying “I’m not the old white guys.”
Oooooh, you just outed yourself to this Conservative!!! I know who you listen to during the evening now!!!!
I listen to my 5 children, my wife, and a lot of chores and repairs and lawn work in the evenings, so I have no idea what you are talking about. But I am interested in who, and why you would think that.
Considering that both Rush Limbaugh and Mark Levin (although through a stand-in host) have mentioned the “old white guy” meme over the last three days, I’d be willing to bet that you’ve given them a listen or two in the last week.
Actually, I got “old white guys” from one of the quotes from a liberal slobbering over Obama, somewhere on this page.
Rush comes on at noon where I live, and he is not someone I prefer to listen too. I drive a route truck for a living, and depend on traffic reports, ect…. so I listen to WBT radio. But Rush is someone I really have a low tolerance for, and usually have to turn the radio waaaaay down.
I personally prefer Keith Larson, the Professional Broadcast! 9 to 12 on WBT. Neither Democrat or Republican, Keith seems to have an honest look into the world. And no, I don’t agree with him all the time, nor do I look to radio hosts as heros. I personally think that some of the dito heads are as bad as the Obambies. (Obama zombies) See link.
I don’t have a mortgage. I don’t want any freebies from Obama. I just like his liberal ideas. And I don’t like conservative ideas. Call it socialism if it makes you feel better, but it’s not.
Eric, I have a link for you
{http://news.yahoo.com/s/livescience/20090518/sc_livescience/happinessisbeingoldmaleandrepublican}
Wait, that smiley was supposed to be
!
Just this once, I’m gonna enjoy your lovely link without offering any political discourse.
(grumbling) stupid fat old guys (grumbling)
Heheheheheheeeeeee. But, I am saddened because I shall only be two out of the three, hehe. I guess I’ll have to settle for being only marginally happier than thou
Froo, awesome link!
Oh, and there’s always gender reassignment surgery…
That copper looks the dead spit of Obama.
Not. Maybe you need new glasses?
I think he does look a bit like Obama, with a foolish grin on his face.
He lacks the ears. Which look like the ears of the men in my family. (Thankfully not the women!!) Wrong shape to the nose also.
True, but the first glance makes you go “WHAT?”
Well, sure, all those black folk look the same anyway, doncha know?
Bull.
These Obama lols are bordering on preachy now… What happened to the funny irreverent stuff?
Also, is Obama getting a bald spot?
Or perhaps a grey patch in the shape of a gerrymander?
It is amazing that people really think that just because he is in office the entire world is going to change there views. I am still being treated the same that I always have and I am not in the “top few”. I have found that if you treat people with respect then they will treat you with respect. So until we get people to stop whining and do something about how they treat others the change will not really happen at our level.
FYI, President Bush went around that thanked every member of the White House staff for being there. Something that President Clinton didn’t do. Seems like this might have really started with Bush not Obama.
Maybe he’s slipping the Cop a tip so he won’t be disturbed while he and John Mccain steal the Royal Jewels.
Bum Bum BUMBUM bum bum BUMBUM
Sh!t, man, he shouldn’t be shaking hands with ANYBODY without a gallon of hand sanitizer at the ready… what if the leader of the free worlds gets swine flu from that…cop!!111elebenty!!
SWINE FLU! ROFL!
LOL! I don’t know if anyone else got it, but I did..
ROFL! Piggy FTW!
Also, teh pres could have gotten teh bobby fired — royal cops are not supposed to shake hands with the public.
Cultural sensitivity fail!
As a Brit could I please ask what the hell you’re talking about? Royal cops?
Got it from DU.
{http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=132&topic_id=8330498&mesg_id=8330498}
I think you’re thinking about the soldiers at Buckingham Palace, not the police outside Number Ten.
Well, I do know that the British have Royal Overseas Police Officers (we called them ROPO’s for short). Does that count since cops is often used in place of police officers?
This actually made me cry.
In a nice way, of course.
……..Wow. I’m surprised you admitted to that.
you missed the point me thinks… maybe not. just interpreted it differently.
difference here between him and, say bush for example: he’s inspiring alot of people, really making a good number of americans proud of their president again and he’s inciting honest and heartfelt loyalty and respect as opposed to fanatical and zealot followers who run to the cause of the republican extremist pundits and evangelicals.
it’s less violent, it’s promoting peace not war and he’s respectful. what’s bad about that?
me thinks you missed the point. My point was that one should not cry, literally, over a politician (and contrary to popular belief Obama is a politician, not christ) shaking hands with someone, as every politician has since the beginning of politics.
The difference between him and bush is that that Obama has duped too many into thinking he has all the answers. Actually I take that back, America has duped themselves.
Pointing out extremists is a moot point as there are many on both sides. I think we can agree they don’t make up the majorities.
There is nothing about less violence or more peace as long as in promoting those things, we reach those ends.
Um respect? I have felt little respect towards myself when it comes to the President. Have you read his biography?
as i corrected myself, “interpreted it differently”
i have the basic underlying disbelief in politicians in general, obama included. i do support him, but i support him because of what he’s done so far. i agree with most of his goals (most, not all) but i maintain that support depending on his current actions, proposed actions and how he handles the situation being given him. he has not, in my opinion, done anything he has no said he would do – the “duping” has occured mainly from the loudest protestors who come across more like they’re having a tantrum because they lost, not for any relevant issues. (there are exceptions to all of this of course – I don’t agree with his stance on gay marriage or immigration, but his foreign policies and actions in the states so far has been acceptable and, for the most part outstanding given the number of crises he’s handling at once).
“There is nothing about less violence or more peace as long as in promoting those things, we reach those ends.” – i’m not sure how you meant to phrase that but it sounds an awful lot like “The ends justify the means” which, may work in some circumstances, but then again – the ends are aways colored by the means, a victory through genocide is not a victory in the sense that the events that follow it in retribution by angered allies is worse than if you had a longer war with no genocide (case in point would be Nazi germany and those scientific discoveries made through unethical experimentation on prisoners).
anyway, i’m not knocking the view, i honestly am curious what your opinion is on that.
Sorry for my bad sentence structure. You did get the point to an extent. I don’t believe the ends justify the means. What I was trying to say was that peace is a goal. Using peace to get to peace doesn’t always work. Gandhi was a great man and his methods worked for his circumstance but that isn’t always the case.
Since you brought up Nazi’s I will use them as an example. The Nazi party went crazy and any one would agree that their methods nor their end products were anything to be desired. Obviously. On the other hand, how long were the germans and surrounding countries in peaceful negotiations? How well did that work? Force was a necessity to reach peace. Those are the situations that require violence to reach peace.
And as far as mister Obama goes, I respect your right to an opinion but i must disagree with first and foremost the out of control spending. That in itself is enough for me to dislike his policies, as well as Bush’s.
I don’t understand what you mean by the duping protesters. I was referring to the sycophants that cry in his very presence, glory be, halleluiah!
I’m not sure which opinion you refer to but I hope I might have covered it.
you did, actually –
“I don’t understand what you mean by the duping protesters. I was referring to the sycophants that cry in his very presence, glory be, halleluiah!” – i agree with you, it’s a person’s actions that define them.
I used the Nazi reference, albiet an over-used one, because I honestly haven’t made up my mind on it in reference to the scientific gains through immoral acts. To throw them away is to give up any remaining social use to their sacrifice, albeit an unwilling one, but to use it might encourage the behavior of immoral acts. Is the knowledge gained worth the cost? I think in the end, knowledge will be the ultimate goal but if we destroy ourselves getting there then what worth was it? And if we move too fast and misuse what we got (like giving a 12 years old the keys to a Viper) we’re likely to just hurt ourselves… Eh.
Good reference, to Ghandi, by the way. Sorry for the rambling, it’s been a long day at work. I’d reread it and edit it but I think there might be something worthwhile up there. Eh.
You know, foolish lolmakers, there are other politicians in this world besides Obama. But I suppose you didn’t know that. Or didn’t WANT to. Because that would debunk your theory that Obama is All-knowing, All-seeing god of the universe. Just because you come up with a ‘witty’ statement comparing Bush to Obama, doesn’t mean you know anything about what the hell’s actually going on.
*other politicians in this world to make lol’s about, that is >_>
you seem angry about something.
*leans back in cumfy chair with doctor glasses*
do tell, did this anger begin in childhood?
What’s great is that just behind Obama, the policeman offered his hand for Gordon Brown to shake. Brown considered for a moment, then walked off without shaking his hand.
Gordon will only fist bump.
I must have slept too little, because at first glance, I thought the guard was Barack Obama in another photo op. The rest of the photo, however, pointed out my mistake. The color balance is shabby, though.
I like several links on this site for a good laugh – but this one is now history for me. It’s not funny and I sure as heck don’t find everything he (Obama) says funny, enlightening, astonishing, cute or remotely entertaining. Neither do I find that everything coming out of Palin, Bush or the Rep Party dumb and stupid. My 2 cents. outta here
There is something very funny about this lol.
Obama was going into Number 10 and right behind him the British PM Gordon Brown was following. As you can see as he walked in the door, Obama reached out and shook the hand of the policeman who was standing duty, much to the policeman’s delight. Then the policeman thought Gordon Brown was also going to shake his hand, and reached out … but Gordon Brown just walked right past.
The full video of this is funny.
He’s civil to public servants? Wow, he must be Jesus!
Where was the shot of Obama shaking hands of our lowly wounded sodliers when he visited them in Germany… oh wait!!!! FAIL!!!
Tru dat.
It would be nice if he felt this way about people in HIS OWN country…too bad he hates the US!!
Which is why he ran for President there. Good call on that one. /sarcasm
Sooooo going from Bush being the president who helped the people of Africa more then any other in history to Obama who doesnt currently have a plan for Africa is good change? I guess starving people dont count as poor. Only if they’re American I guess.
I would really like some citation on that one. How exactly did Bush help Africa more then any(?) other in history?
He funneled a bunch of money to Africa for AIDS research and medical help. Even liberals have to admit he did a good thing with that one. I believe (and don’t quote me here) that he spent more in Africa on AIDS than any other prez in history.
Yeah, I’ve heard that before, and I’ll give him that one. Kudos to Bush for sending the money to help out with a sadly almost forgotten disease these days.
Have you heard of AFRICOM? (Most people haven’t.)
2006 – Bush triples aid to Africa:
http : //www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/12/30/AR2006123000941.html
2008 – Bush has given more African aid than any other President:
http : //www.independent.co.uk/news/world/africa/popular-in-africa-bush-has-given-more-aid-than-any-other-us-president-783387.html
2009 – Bush and Pepfar:
http : //www.guardian.co.uk/world/2009/jan/17/george-bush-aids-africa
Thanks froo and Dhoti! It just sounded to far fetched.
Middle-low class get huge benefits. What do the millionaires get? Oh ya, they pay for it!
Now high enders get to pay for low enders! socialism at work?
And millionaires make their money from the middle class… Millionaires get… Millions of goddamn dollars, ya putz.
And here I thought you were going to lay off the “economics” talk…
That’s not economics talk. That’s pointing out a rather glaring logic fail.
Pretty much, just talking the logic fail out.
Go look up “investment” sometime, chief.
WTF are you even talking about? DWM was pointing out that millionaires don’t need to get any sort of huge benefits because they already have millions of dollars. Frankly, if I had the choice of being a millionaire paying excessive taxes to help the lower middle class, or being in the lower middle class and receiving said benefits, I’d go with being the freaking millionaire. Because I’d still be way the hell better off than I am now. Thus the obvious fail of Cowpie’s post.
I’d been wondering why there was never a game show called “Who Wants to be Lower Middle Class?” (Crap, now that I’ve thought of it, somebody’ll do it….)
Upper lower class wants…
Exactly…as soon as I typed it I thought “Oh, hell, now I’m going to turn on the tv and see homeless people and minimum-wage workers competing to become lower-middle class…” Bob, you’ve won a two-bedroom apartment, a 20″ television, and a job paying $25,000 a year with minimal benefits.
“And we were happy with that in my day! And we *walked* to work, not because we thought the Earth would burn to death, but because we *liked it*! So don’t give me your sass!”
Actually, Bob’s thrilled, as he’s been living in a ’72 Gremlin since he got laid off.
Unless he lived in Boston, because then he wouldn’t be able to afford that apartment without 3 roommates!
Uphill, both ways…
Through six feet of the coldest snow evah… year round!
Fighting dangerous wildlife and drug crazed hippies with just a notebook and sheer grit.
“we ate gravel”
~
You had gravel? You lucky BASTARD!!
“Oh, hell, now I’m going to turn on the tv and see homeless people and minimum-wage workers competing to become lower-middle class…””
`
You can walk into any employment office any day of the week and see that in real life, unfortunately.
Well, yes, but there’s no studio audience, brilliantly grinning host, or fabulous set, so it’s considerably less entertaining.
Which is for the best as I don’t want to see it become Bum Fights for a jaded audience of misanthropes.
No, no, there’s no fighting involved, just, um…trivia questions and puzzle-solving type stuff. I’ll make you Executive Producer, if you like!
Nah, I’ll pass. I can’t be in charge of everything, it would give me a big head.
Yep, having millions is horrible and of no inherent benefit at all. I don’t hate millionaires, hell, I don’t even want any special treatment but I also don’t pretend that their lives are horrid or that they are being tortured by the damn dirty peasants.
Well, the hot tubs that the upper class just bought us are pretty freaking nice, but I’m calling my local millionaire and complaining that I requested the Kenmore ELITE kitchen appliances, not the boring old Kenmore ones. And why didn’t we get our HDTV’s with HDMI hookups? What kind of handouts are these? Geez!
You don’t seem to be grasping the difference between income and wealth. That’s such a colossal fail that I can’t even wrap my mind around it — are you really that daft?
And where exactly do you think wealth comes from? Not everybody inherits it, ya know. Investments come from having money to make more money, it doesn’t equal the beginning of having money.
Are you seriously just not elucidating everything or are you that daft?
*fights, but can’t resist*
Wealth comes from bank vaults, silly.
:lol;
I’m not sure where you’re getting this “magic pile of money” theory from — money doesn’t obey Metcalfe’s Law, unfortunately.
But if you can’t be bothered to respond better than you did below, then don’t bother at all.
I don’t think anyone’s discussing a “magic pile of money”, more just the fact that in order to accumulate/maintain wealth you have to have an income greater than your expenses, whether that comes from a job, a business, interest and earnings on prior investments, or whatever. You have to have income to accumulate wealth, which then provides more income (unless you really blow it), creating more wealth.
Of which I don’t have much at the moment.
That is exactly what I am discussing. Dhoti can’t function unless he makes up something to be superior about.
But this whole thread is hating on people who have a million bucks, not people who are making a million bucks — that’s where I think the “magic money” thing is coming from, that having a bunch of cash in the bank somehow implies that there’s some middle-class boot-stomping.
Income — maybe, but still, society’s more than just robber barons and wage slaves. (Besides, in that case, where would robber barons come from?)
And this is where you are still making things up. I never implied boot stomping on the middle class. I stated, very clearly, that the millionaires wouldn’t be millionaires without the middle class.
Saying things are intrinsically linked isn’t implying magic piles of money or boot stomping.
I categorically deny ever hating on millionaires (with a possible exception for Paris Hilton. And maybe Donald Trump, although I don’t hate either of them so much as find them annoying famewhores). I wouldn’t mind being one…
I’m not saying you’re doing the hating, diss, and I’m using the term a bit facetiously anyway. No problem hating on Paris, though.
Dwn, don’t be needlessly pedantic. Change the language however you like.
@Dhoti: They linked. It isn’t even debatable. Millionaires aren’t able to become millionaires without using or having the support of the middle class and lower class.
There is nothing to be pedantic about. I’m not accusing anybody of being stomped, period.
Stop making up arguments where there isn’t any, seriously.
It “isn’t even debatable”, huh? Is that your way of saying you just don’t feel like answering?
Not really, I did answer. I stated that I didn’t say that the middle class was being stomped. I said that Millionaires are linked to the middle class. The reverse is also true.
You are claiming there is hate when I am not even talking about dislike of millionaires. I can’t answer a question twice as the answer remains the same.
Okay, starting fresh…
Cowpie said (by my reading) that the rich are net payers to government, while the poor are net receivers. (I don’t think this is too contentious — a new $200K Bentley uses the same roads as a used $2K Camry without delivering 100x the wear and tear.)
So if you follow up by saying that millionaires make their money from the middle class, why would you be talking about businesses when Cowpie was talking about taxes? In context, you appear to be arguing that the rich are receiving millions from the middle class *via the government*. I’d think that would be considered stomping. (And again, don’t be pedantic about the language.)
Now, even if I missed the topic change and we are now talking about businesses, that still ignores what has been the classic middle-class path to financial security pretty much since the end of WWII in the US:
- Keep a middle-class job through your working years
- Save 10+% and invest it in the stock market
- Buy affordable houses to live in
- Retire with a million bucks, more if you’re lucky
In fact, I think this is how most millionaires are formed — not through business ownership. (A small fraction of the millionaires I know personally made it through their businesses rather than through savings and wise investment.)
“Middle-low class get huge benefits. What do the millionaires get? Oh ya, they pay for it!
Now high enders get to pay for low enders! socialism at work?”
That is the original piss stained statement, pretty much saying that the rich have the short end of things.
I contended by the fact that millionaires are in fact, millionaires. I then follow up by saying that millionaires wouldn’t be millionaires without the middle class and that both are linked. This isn’t saying that anybody is getting stomped, it is saying that they are linked. If I meant stomped on, I would say stomped on.
As for your statement of how a millionaire is made, that is pretty much what I have been saying. Wealth doesn’t just appear, it comes from the middle class. Specifically, the work of the middle class. They work, they save, they work some more, and build up wealth.
I am still wondering where you saw contention in the first place if we are basically agreeing.
Also, if you decide to play the who started it game again, reread your first post to me very careful and take note of its mocking tone.
“Piss stained”, huh? That doesn’t seem to leave a whole lot of room for discussion, does it?
I don’t see any point in continuing — but by all means, don’t let that stop you from taking a victory lap or two.
As far as him being an idiot, not so much. But as it is, you and I are in agreement so what exactly would you like to discuss that you feel is still open?
It’s cute when you heckle me. Or are you trying to say that millionaires get their money out of the air?
I’m saying that, even for someone who isn’t well-informed on the subject, the knee-jerk class warfare rhetoric is a lame response. Or have you given up all pretense of “intelligent dialog” by now?
Considering that investments means you have to get the money from somewhere first, have you given up the pretense of thinking it all the way out first?
To invest, you need money. To get money on your own, you either need to provide a service or sell something. Without the middle class and hell, the lower class, you don’t get any money as it is the middle class and lower class who have to do the grunt work in the end to create the product.
Unless you are saying that any given millionaire quarries/logs/grinds/mills/etc all their own goods and even the good they sell.
Speaking of class warfare, maybe you missed this statement that I was responding to: “Middle-low class get huge benefits. What do the millionaires get? Oh ya, they pay for it!”
So who is pulling the class warfare shit? It sure wasn’t me as I was stating that all the classes are fu(king connected.
I advise you not to start your shit with me today, I am no mood for your pseudointellectual trolling bullshit, especially when you are making something up for you to heckle me about.
If you are going to heckle, at least do me the courtesy of heckling me for something I actually did, jackass.
Anything else you would like to “say” or can I be spared your high horse shit cavalry today?
So that’s a “yes”, apparently. Good to know.
Let me know when you can be bothered to respond with something above screeching and personal attacks — we can talk then. In the meantime, not worth it, is it?
Listen ass, I’ve coddled you long enough on these boards. I am done doing so.
So if you want to actually bring up facts, then do it. Otherwise, you are just shouting back a snide remark while you run the hell off.
So here is the bottom fu(king line. Investments can only occur if you actually have the capital to invest. It is a way to use money to make more money. It isn’t how you get money in the first place.
You get money in the first place by providing a good or service. Those goods and services are inevitably traceable to the middle and lower class with making it and most likely with buying it, except in the case of super high end items like a yacht. Even with yachts, Bob the middle class dude is making the parts despite any mark up.
So yes, I am sticking to the idea that millionaires wouldn’t have millions without the middle class and thus are intrinsically linked.
If you are going to continue to back out like a damn intellectual coward anytime I catch you in bullshit, why bother in the first place?
There are plenty of points to debate if you actually have the gonadal fortitude. If you actually say something that isn’t a whiny, pointless statement, I actually will respond in a civil manner. However, I am done with your bullshit. Completely done. If you decide to be an ass from the beginning, I will treat you like the jerk off that you are. You want to be treated better, then be better.
I’m loving this new trend of you unilaterally calling retreats and declaring victory, Baghdad Bob style. (I guess I should start calling you Baghdad Dwn, huh?) And the whole “catching you in bullshit” canard — i.e. daring to disagree with whatever you’ve decided your opinion is — is quite a nice touch.
I can’t wait to see how Coddler Dwn transforms into Enforcer Dwn.
When you do everything in your power to avoid the actual point, yes, I call that a retreat. Care to prove me wrong or shall you taunt me a second time?
So Frenchie Dhoti, what shall it be? My money is on taunting.
I’m sure it is. Have you *ever* responded to something I’ve said without turning it into a moral lecture? You seem to have a deep-seated need to feel morally superior to anyone who disagrees with you.
Now, do you want to get back on topic? Do you even remember what it is? Or do you want to keep trying to distract us from remembering that *you* derailed this thread in the first place?
{http://punditkitchen.com/2009/05/18/political-pictures-obama-right-change/comment-page-1/#comment-164396}
Derailing thread with a subject change.
-
{http://punditkitchen.com/2009/05/18/political-pictures-obama-right-change/comment-page-1/#comment-164414}
Derailing thread with a non-comment on the issue and an insult.
So I guess I won my e-money for taunting a second time.
I’ve posted twice now on topic, your lack of reading comprehension doesn’t change that.
Here, I will even import it for ya.
“Investments can only occur if you actually have the capital to invest. It is a way to use money to make more money. It isn’t how you get money in the first place.
You get money in the first place by providing a good or service. Those goods and services are inevitably traceable to the middle and lower class with making it and most likely with buying it, except in the case of super high end items like a yacht. Even with yachts, Bob the middle class dude is making the parts despite any mark up.
So yes, I am sticking to the idea that millionaires wouldn’t have millions without the middle class and thus are intrinsically linked.”
Since that is a repost and those reading actually know this, care to address it since it is the third time I have stated this or shall we continue with you dancing around it and claiming I am distracting. *puts money on the latter*
And just in the nick of time, in rides froo with her selective memory and quiver full of irrelevant links. I’ve proven you wrong so many times before, but you just don’t give up.
@Dhoti: Yep. Irrelevant because they prove you wrong. Totally.
Here is a secret, declaring something irrelevant doesn’t make it so. Also, selective memory has no point in this discussion as it is a FORUM and you can Read what has happened in the immediate past with relative ease.
Dwn, you skipped right over the first paragraph, where you laid down this little gem:”[H]ave you given up the pretense of thinking it all the way out first?” Not to mention all the “jackass”, etc. you threw in at the end, after your so-called “intellectual discourse”.
So please, tell me how you kept it highbrow and even tried to respond. But, yet again, I’m sure it’s my fault I didn’t take your stinky bait.
“I’m saying that, even for someone who isn’t well-informed on the subject, the knee-jerk class warfare rhetoric is a lame response. Or have you given up all pretense of “intelligent dialog” by now?”
Your post. The one I responded to. The one that started off with a snide remark and veiled insult. Yea, that was you.
Tell me again how you started this off with a high brow remark? Cuz you sure as hell deserve to be insulted when you start off insulting.
And yes, you’re still an intellectual coward for not rebuttaling the on topic material. Unlike you, I’m not pretending to be high brow. I already told you that I am done with your bullshit. If you insult me, I will come right back at you.
So shall you continue taunting me or will you actually respond to what I have been saying all along that has been on topic… All Along…
There’s that selective memory again…
When I look at that post, here’s all I see:
*insult*
*obligatory pretend statement to play at making a point*
*insult*
So you see, no relevant point. No amount of wailing and gnashing of teeth on your part is going to create something that was never there. But feel free to keep the act going — you’ve worked yourself into quite a fervor of moral superiority, and I’d hate to burst your bubble with the truth.
I’m glad you’ve finally admitted what you see when you read a post. Essentially it’s “blah blah blah I’m a dirty liberal blah blah blah blah Dhoti is king and all-knowing blah blah blah blah unformed discussion blah blah.” Did I get close?
So pretty much, you lack any ability to address the idea that investments don’t create money, they use money to make more money and that millionaires wouldn’t be millionaires without the middle class.
Least we covered that. I can move on since you can’t do more than go “Nuh uh” to what I am saying.
I’m surprised you lasted that long before declaring “victory”, Baghdad Dwn. Tell you what — if you come up with an on-topic point you want to actually discuss, and you can express it without an insult, or as a canard for throwing in another insult, you know where to find me.
If you want to just throw insults back and forth, I don’t care, just have the balls to own up to it. In the vernacular, don’t sh!t in my hand and call it steak.
Always a pleasure, froo.
Ah, and thus the Frenchman Dhoti leaves after taunting yet another time.
He smacks somebody and fusses when smacked back.
Bye Dhoti, you won’t be missed.
I couldn’t live in your world, Dwn, but I’d like to visit sometime. It sounds like a lovely place.
You forget, DWN. Dhoti is right and everyone else is wrong, and if we don’t just accept that he’s right, then we are even more wrong. Even though everyone else in the place thinks that Dhoti is wrong, he’s still right, because we are just monkeys jumping off a bridge like our mommies told us not to do.
-
So, the sooner you realize that and accept it as truth, the happier you will be, because the Rightness of The Dhoti is all-encompassing, and will make you happy. And pay your bills.
*considers the All Encompassing Right of Dhoti*
.
..
…
….
…..
……
…….
Um nope, still just seems like a flaccid man trying to will his penis into function while yelling at everybody else.
I’m confused, Dwn. In your world, what’s the proper rebuttal to an insult? Were you expecting me to ignore the insults and respond to your “ideas”, even though you only made them to bait more follow-up insults later? Or am I just supposed to bide my time until you declare victory?
I’ll be sure to head on out, now that I know mean old Dwn doesn’t like me. Boo hoo.
Dude, you don’t even see where you starting by insult me from the damn beginning, which makes this a He said/He said argument, except that reading the beginning of the tangent backs me up, not you.
As for rebuttaling, it is simple. If my ideas are wrong, prove it. The insults are the result of your insults so you can address like a big boy or you can ignore them as you expect all of us to ignore yours.
It really isn’t harder than that.
So I have to ignore your insults? Isn’t that what you’re accusing me of trying to make you do? Project much?
Even when I give you a second chance — I’m a glutton for punishment, apparently — you don’t respond. You just complain about my choice of words and *again* make yourself into the moral champion. I’m sure the insults aren’t far behind.
{http://punditkitchen.com/2009/05/18/political-pictures-obama-right-change/comment-page-1/#comment-164414}
I’m still trying to figure out how this is an answer to anything that was said, and how it wasn’t an insult to DWN. Of course, I’m sure you’ll tell me I’m just an ignorant idiot who can’t read, but please, indulge me, and spell it out in crayon for me, as I’m obviously missing something. I still haven’t seen a response to anything DWN has said.
“you can address like a big boy OR you can ignore them as you expect all of us to ignore yours”
Ya know, I am starting to get it… You have a reading disability, which is why you can’t fathom the entirety of a post. It all makes so much sense now.
That explains why you can’t read all of a post and actually get what is there. It explains why you think you have some kind of high ground after starting the conversation with an insult… Wow.
I’m really sorry that I didn’t realize that you were a mental cripple from the beginning. Bless your little heart.
Later all, going home and I’ve been on here all damn day. See ya tomorrow.
Go get some sleep — maybe your brain will chew this one over and you’ll wake up a little bit wiser.
It’s “not even debatable”, after all.
Nope, nothing changed.
Millionaires are still linked to the middle class. Investments still come from income. Income still comes from either producing a product or a service. Services and products are still maintained and created by the middle class. Income is still essential to wealth. And nobody was discussing class warfare before you.
Any other key phrases to lock onto to avoid giving an actual answer or will you just “Taunt me again?” Cuz all I am hearing is how my mother was a hamster and my father smelled of elderberry. By all means, continue taunting, it amuses me that you can’t rebuttal and keep claiming there is nothing to rebuttal.
@DWN: I say let it go, man. He knows what you’re talking about, he just wants to be a twat.
-
*waits for the witty reply*
True, it has boiled down to a very odd argument of us saying “No you’re right! No you!” since we both seem to argee in the other little side thread.
*agree
Damn typos
And that, kids, is what they call “pwned.”
It’s sad when the pwned don’t realize they’ve been pwned, and walk around all day with the signs of pwning all over them, wondering why the little children point and laugh.
Actually he said plenty of things to respond to you before mentioning how annoying you are, and I think he did rather well especially considering how at the get-go you said you weren’t expecting anything intelligent from him. I think it’s funny that when he responds, you totally ignore that part. You’ve lost. Bow out gracefully.
In other words, you failed on your own, so you hopped on the bandwagon of someone too gauche to know when to shut up.
LOL, you haven’t even addressed my points and they have been mentioned three damn times. How do you even make this level of pretension up? Hell, least with my bullshit, I try to make a point on topic.
Disclaimer for the dim: Reread my posts, my point has been reiterated three damn times about the millionaires issue.
What? I didn’t fail. I didn’t hop on the bandwagon either. I joined in because you joined in to start sh!t with DWM and were naturally wrong. I don’t get those who say you’re not a troll and can be intelligent. I haven’t seen anything but baiting, misdirecting, and projecting from you since I came here.
Dear Dhoti:
You seem to hate all the captions and pictures. You scream about liberals through pretentious, “sarcastic” comments. Nearly everyone on this site finds you extremely annoying. Why are you still on this site?
Sincerely, Igloo and 95% of Pundit Kitchen
I’d up that percentage to around 99%, but otherwise, right on.
Because it’s not a PK bandwagon until froo jumps aboard…
Yup, you’re exactly right. I’m a bandwagon jumper. Truly, the level at which your brain functions is a wonderous and amazing thing.
In fairness, your tendencies are pretty obvious. After all, you’re just trying to “help” me, right?
I’ve seen froo disagree with a number of regulars here, including in this very thread.
Sure, on mostly inconsequential stuff — that’s all part of being the token rightie. But on the big stuff, especially tone and the “place” of those outside the far left, I haven’t seen much dissent.
But I’m the one with selective reading habits, Eric, remember?
Oh yessum, massah. Shoulds I be gettin’ yor meals fer you ’round about nao?
@Dhoti
Just because the majority of the people on this website aren’t f*(ktarded enough to agree with your opinions doesn’t mean that anyone else who agrees with someone is “jumping on the bandwagon”
Igloo, it’s a really really big bandwagon.
I dunno. I’ve seen her pull out some serious right wing opinions on here. By “tone” I’m guessing you mean she doesn’t get into a feral cat fight with every left winger on here like you do. Although tone is a bit subjective since we’re typing on the Internet.
I can’t believe you all just ignored that horribly offensive racist bomb froo just dropped. Wow.
A token response for your token demand of subservience to your points. You are the one telling her what to do. Why wouldn’t she mock you?
How does that excuse the racism?
The same way you think a racist comment from somebody else makes you less of an ass.
You’re both asses. Deal with it.
Well, that was the weakest condemnation I’ve ever seen. Were you tired after yet again climbing onto your soapbox?
One can only say exactly what something is so many times before it gets old. You’re an ass and I am tired of you acting shocked when people treat you like one.
As for froofrou’s comment, what about it? We say dead baby jokes and mock things all the time here. At what point did you believe that skin color was special? EVERYBODY AND EVERYTHING gets mocked here, especially you. I just lack the energy for it today since you are overflowing with bullshit and I reached my quota yesterday.
So, racial slurs are just good old fashioned mocking, eh? Next you’re going to say anyone who’s offended by it is uppity, and needs to learn their place…
Right, I forgot — this is one of those times where you just “don’t feel like” following the same rules you say apply to everyone else. Special little snowflake, and all that.
@Dhoti: So do I correctly understand that you are arguing that anytime a humorous or snide remark involves a stereotype associated with race, it’s automatically racist?
Not at all, Diss. I’m simply saying that we should brook no tolerance for slurs.
Eh, there is no “place” to learn. We are all equal and I expect anybody who wants to complain about it to complain about it. Much like you. And I will care just as little then as I do now.
There isn’t anything to be uppity about complaining nor would I use the word uppity. Annoying perhaps but people are entitled to their opinions, after all. I just don’t require a give a damn clause so I don’t.
“I just don’t require a give a damn clause so I don’t.”
Ugh, that is horridly worded.
I just don’t have to give a damn so I don’t.
There, corrected.
@ Dhoti: Gotcha. I’d say you were reading more into the post than was intended, in that case. But as it wasn’t my post, I’ll leave it alone for now.
Thanks for the step back, Diss. I’ll admit, I may be overreacting, but I’m also pretty sure if that if someone actually spoke that to me, accent and all, we would have words.
@Dhoti: We all have our stuff that “sets us off”; it’s a good thing when we realize what our “stuff” is!
Fair enough, Dhoti, I apologize. We all have our buttons. No worries.
No one’s forcing you to read my comments. Why would you even bother to complain?
Dude, the whole “stop complaining about my complaining” argument is weak. Besides, it wasn’t really a complaint–I addressed it to you and was asking a question.
Also-I made it 95% because I figured some people must just find his lameness hilarious.
Performance art at its finest.
I still want to know when I failed, and what I failed to do.
You stopped answering my questions and came down here to egg Dwn on. Why else?
You asked me a question?
@Dhoti. Dude, your behavior is predictable, rude, and boring. Go find a life.
@viking gal: I agree about Dhoti. But he will not go find a life, he likes to hang out where he is not wanted fulfilling some desperate trollish need to have attention heaped upon him in oozing wasteful commentaries.
Why are we feeding this troll?
Mostly boredom.
DWN, I have something to keep you entertained…. Tee hee.
As long as it’s not racist, like froo’s little ditty…
froo, you’re racist?
Apparently being called a “house n*gger” in everything but name over the past few months by Dhoti has been forgotten by him, but hey, if commenting on his treatment of me is racist, then I guess I am.
Cite?
Oh wait, I know the answer to this…….
-
If you can’t remember what you said, why should I cite it. After all, it’s all there for you to find, if you were only smart enough to read it.
-
I think that’s how you would answer. And being called a “fake conservative”, a follower, a token righty, and the like are all the same as being called a house n*gger.
But froo, even if he did find it, he would deny that’s what he was saying (even though the rest of us caught on.)
Ah yes, how could I forget the stock answers from god
This should belong in the fail blog! Obama isn’t showing any respect for the cop, he’s just walking by as he casually shakes his hand. He doesn’t even look him in the eye! To me this is actually disrespectful. I could not imagine any intelligent Obama fan writing this.
Yeah, the cop looks all bent out of shape about being dissed so badly. Not.
Normally nobody pays any attention to the cop outside #10. Obama broke protocol by giving him a shake on the way in. Nice gesture.
“He doesn’t even look him in the eye!”
`
This is about the kazillionth time somebody has posted this, and I don’t get it. How does anybody know whether or not Obama made eye contact with the police officer [pay attention now] *by looking at this picture*?? Given the relative positioning of the two people in the picture, it’s obvious that the photographer snapped it *after* Obama has walked past the police officer. Prior to that, as far as anybody knows, he could have been gazing soulfully into the policeman’s eyes for ten minutes, and then complimenting his spiffy hat.
`
Really, folks; how desperate for a nitpick do you have to be to complain that Obama is making eye contact with somebody who is (at the moment of the picture) BEHIND him??? I know you think he’s Satan, but nobody has yet posited the theory that he’s the Exorcist; he can’t turn his head around backwards.
“is making eye contact”
`
should have been, “is not making eye contact”
Those pictures are being suppressed by the vast left-wing conspiracy.
Left Wings are suppressing the demonic possession photos while the Right Wing suppresses Cheney’s demonic true form photos.
Meanwhile, commies are suppressing the photos of Obama looking deep into the cop’s eyes before passing as they don’t want to disturb the conservatives who would make implications of teh geh! Instead, the commies are satisfied with conservatives making the elitist claim as it is as useless as calling somebody stuck up.
Okay? Obama shakes someone’s hand and this makes headlines? This sure is change- Bush wasn’t stupid enough to bow to a Saudi King or make friends with terrorists…
I’m not so sure of that.
No, Bush held hands with him. Check the pictures. A bow is gracious. Holding hands is… um… you decide.
A bow is a form of submission, which you don’t do when you’re an equal or better.
Sorry, bows aren’t necessarily a form of submission. It depends on the type of bow. The Japanese have a whole strata of bowing.
It is considered very disrespectful if you don’t bow at all. Equals can still bow to each other.
I believe (and don’t quote me on this one either), that you can’t in SAUDI culture without admitting to the king that you are his subordinate and give in to him. Anyway, the whole thing was seen as a faux pas when it happened, and that hasn’t changed.
Not to be a snide and snarky ass, well, yes I am going to be a snide and snarky ass.
8 years from now, Obama will definitely not be president. However, 8 years from now, barring death, the Saudi King will still be a king.
XD
Snarky ass
Leader of the Free World. That’s all I’m sayin’
He isn’t in control of Canada or Australia…
Though Australiai sounds like an annoying place to live as far as internet goes.
Oh friend, you have NO idea.. and it’s about to get worse.
Ya, Snap, Crackle, Fu(k that…
Not to be a snarky ass.. But he could be assuming he loses in 2012 and wins in 2016. That would make him President in 2017 which is.. 8 years from now.
Love you DWN.
You rock hun, I hadn’t thought of that.
It was late and I was fired up.
*gives ginger*
*accepts ginger gracefully*
I’m gonna need the rest of the day off.
Go for it.
English fail.
Dude, did you even look at any of the comments?
I’m going with.. No.
Some moron put this on StumbleUpon. I hope they get hit by a bus.
I don’t get it. Is that implicating that all the other 43 presidents didn’t treat people with low income as people?? Even if that’s the case, I don’t find the LoL in this.
Who here remembers the controversial things Obama mistakenly said about Joe the Plumber?
I don’t remember a single mistaken or controversial thing Obama said about Sam Wurzelbacher. Can you share any of them, perhaps with proper links?
Also, it’s “implying”, not “implicating”. No one’s providing evidence linking past presidents to any crimes here.
P.S. The calling of JOE by his first legal name is irritating to me. My brother is Joseph David, has been known as David his whole life, and is DAVID. Just because Joe the Plumber’s first legal name is Sam doesn’t make him a Sam. He’s a Joe.
-
That is all.
-
/rant.
Well, I’m still pissed that he characterized himself as a plumber who was about to purchase his own plumbing business, when he:
1) Has no plumbing liscense
2) Had no legitimate way of financing the purchase of a large plumbing business
3) Would never in his lifetime build a plumbing business to the point where would net $250,000/year
And still, some folks (not pointing any fingers here)(coughcoughfroocoughcough) treat him as if he were an honest working class joe, instead of a lying, ill-educated opportunistic swine who should never be allowed near a camera.
/rant
You forgot was on welfare but wants it denied to others and is guilty of tax evasion.
Want to point out where I said anything about his work ethic? It’s the mis-naming that irritates me, dammit! I can’t remember ever actually speaking up in his favor other than that.
Understand why I advocating him over Seth for special carpet sessions?
Carpet, itching powder, and a light slam or two works for me. *grabs duct tape*
*advocated
tense fail.
Dont’ be so tense. It pinches your shoulders.
…”Here”…
I don’t know if it’s courage, but it’s definitely classy!
Call me dumb… but I don’t get it?
since when does shaking someone’s hand qualify you as a great leader?
i wonder how many hand GWB shook…
why are you sheep worshiping this false messiah?
Anything Obama does, the liberals praise.
The only thing Obama hasn’t been praised for is when he bowed to the King of Saudi Arabia, which was a sign of weakness of our country. Obama hasn’t been criticized much for that either. His faults are being ignored, while anything else is being praised out of proportion.
Keep in mind that almost all the presidents enjoy high approval ratings during the first 6 months in office. That includes both George W. Bush and Bill Clinton. After the honeymoon, everyone starts to see the faults of the president. That will apply Obama as well.
It would be better if he was actually looking at the guy in the photo, but I like the idea behind this one.
The photo is a fake. It is funny how people want to believe that Obama is a good guy. He is a power hungry leftist who doesn’t give a about a policeman or any other low life position under him unless it makes him look good.
Where is the proof that the photo is a fake? I believe there is video of the incident.
I, for one, object to the use of “leftist” as a perjorative.
I object to your use of object.
Yeah. Put the object in at a better angle, already.
A little to the … left.
Just a weeeee more leftie, ahhhh. Oh G that’s it.
I object your writing of the word ‘use’.
I write to the objection of your use the word.
On a typical day, you’d find at least 4 film crews (BBC, ITN, CNN and Sky News) and 20plus still photographers outside 10 Downing Street. This being the G20 Summit, I’d expect even more than that!
This isn’t funny. It’s supposed to be one of the “OH MAH GAWD OBAM IS THE BEZT PREZ EVERS!!!!1!!1″ things. But which president refused to shake hands with the cops? Or was disrespectful in anyway to the police? This picture can kiss my left nut
All politics aside (if you bigots, left, right and center, can imagine that), isn’t this concept overdue? You know, treating people like people and not “human resources”i.e. something to be used up by heartless business and replaced with even cheaper “resources” to be abused and exploited-might even boost production to cultivate a sense of humanity in the workplace.
Trickle up Poverty – NOW THAT’S CHANGE…
Your missing the point he was giving him props… Not a handshake.
If it was a handshake it would have brought all the boys to the yard!
change is all that’s left from my paycheck with this guy.
he’s an elitist
PK’s Law:
As an argument on PK grows longer (regardless of the lol that sparked the argument) the probability of said argument turning into an abortion debate approaches 1.
The Obama worship is rapidly getting non-LOL. Check out the NY Times:
“Human rights advocates are growing deeply uneasy with Mr. Obama’s stance on these issues [preventative detention], especially his recent move to block the release of photographs showing abuse of detainees, and his announcement that he is willing to try terrorism suspects in military commissions — a concept he criticized bitterly as a presidential candidate.”
That Syntax made me go cross eyed.
Not seeing people inside of the womb as worth treating like humans: Exactly the wrong kind of change.
Sorry if someone’s already said something to that effect; I didn’t feel like reading 617 comments
Not seeing people outside of the womb as worth treating like humans: Exactly the wrong kind of change.
too many comments to sift through; I’ll jump to the point:
It’s funny because the “more senior” (president of the USA) shook hands with the policeman, whereas the prime minister, Gordon Brown (who was right behind Obama and just out of shot) didn’t. The policeman offered his hand and Gordon just walked away.
Uhhmm… you DO know it’s not protocol to shake hands with the royal guard, right?
Except Gordon Brown isn’t Royalty…
http://failblog.org/2009/05/28/gordon-brown-fail/ This explains it.
Income bracket?? Really?
So the genius who captioned this image didn’t see that its a “color” bracket?
If that guard was white, you think that idiot would even bother looking at him? That’s enough people, the worshiping is getting out of hand.
A funnier caption would have been:
B.O.: Here’s the keys. Don’t scratch the paint, and I’ve written down the mileage.
Cop (thinking): “Sucka…”
pardon me while i sacrafice this goat to my lord obama….come here little goat..come here…
The LOL is that the LMP officer is laughing under his breath about the moron who though the proper gift for a Royal Family Member- who gives you a priceless, hand-made, one of a kind item made from the wood of a 2 century old warship- was 20 DVDs that were probably bought at Wal-Mart.
The LMP is laughing because he could do a better job than Obama!
Thanks a lot for sharing this with all people you actually recognize what you’re speaking about! Bookmarked. Please additionally consult with my web site =). We can have a hyperlink exchange agreement between us
I like the helpful information you provide in your articles. I?ll bookmark your blog and check again right here regularly. I am reasonably sure I will be informed lots of new stuff right here! Good luck for the next!
The People’s Breasts appreciate your awe and worship of them as is their due.
Women have eyes?
With a penis… But enough about my weekend…
*wiggles eyebrows*
Sounds nicer than mine!
We sent the boys to their grandmother’s house for the weekend. The smile still on her face is priceless.
Good for you two! Sometimes you just need a little bit of quality alone time, glad you guys could work it out.
It was oddly pleasant being able to sleep in without worrying that one of the kids was destroying something…
Ah, the dreaded, it’s quiet in here. Almost… TOO quiet.
So we filled the empty air with noises of flogging and body rubbing. She got the full out warm up and then hardcore beating she wanted and I got a full body rub. It was rather cool, then I was expected to get up…
I can’t describe how hard it is to move after having your arms, legs, feet, shoulders, and back rubbed.
Ask hubby after last night.
Yes. Under their shirts. Which is why you have to look so HARD!
Those are eyes? They look like nipples.
I know, right? If women would just walk around all day with their shirts off, we’d never make that mistake again…
This thread is relevant to my interests.