And if you can’t think of anything to chat about, why not show your love, link over to Wampum and cast your vote for HA in the Koufax Awards:
Best State & Local Blog
Best Series (on Mike Brown & FEMA)
If you only have time for one, do the Best State & Local Blog category; just leave “HorsesAss.org” in the comment thread. This round of voting closes Sunday. Thanks.
Republicans: The Party of Death
I see your still alive Clueless.
I guess they missed one.
To Richard Pope:
Hey, jackass. Just found this on the PDC’s website. Have you ever won anything in your sad little existance?
“The Commission voted to recommend that the Attorney General take no further action on a 45-day citizen action letter that alleged Dwight Pelz failed to 1) timely report contributions and expenditures for his 2005 King County Council campaign and the disposition of surplus funds, and 2) include information about the open records inspection period on his candidate registration form. The Commission recommended no further action after considering staff’s investigative findings that showed the 2005 Pelz King County Campiang was discontinued after March 2004 when he became a candidate for Seattle City Council and that all reports were filed and available to the public at least one year prior to the 2005 election.”
Found here.
The Law of Unintended Consequences is an amazing thing. Take, for example, the Supreme Court decision back in 1973 legalizing abortions. As a college student back in those times, I remember lots of flyers and posters around campus supporting abortion rights for women. One of them that stuck me as particularly effective was a poster declaring that not allowing women reproductive choice amounted to “mandatory motherhood.”
Well, it seems that the Law of Unintended Consequences has once again intervened in the affairs of men and women. Matt Dubay, a computer technician from the Midwest, is suing to avoid paying child support to a woman who had a child after a liaison with him. He is alleging she tricked him by stating that she could not have children and allowed him to think a sexual relationship with her would not mean an unintended pregnancy. Now Mr. Dubay has a daughter that he never intended to have, and the woman demands child support.
I support Mr. Dubay. Roe v. Wade made a woman’s right to choose legal. If the choice was to not be a mother, then that was the woman’s choice. All Mr. Dubay is demanding is the same choice for a man. Men have just as much as women to not choose parenthood. If a man makes it clear he is not interested in fathering a child, then, in the event of unintended pregnancy, the woman has her choice. If the choice is to continue the pregnancy, then she must accept the financial obligations involved in raising the child.
Choices in life come with responsibilities and consequences. Choose carefully.
Libertarian,
You’ve posed an interesting question. Viewing the matter entirely from the father’s perspective, I would tend to agree with you. The child support laws, however, are typically intended to promote the child’s interest. The child played no role in the deception of his or her mother. Accordingly, I’d have a tough time punishing the child for such deception by denying support from the father.
Oink @ 2
Hey Oink. How’s the get-togethers going with Jim West at Mr. Cynical’s ranch?
It’s seems like you’ve gotten over the hump on your same-sex supply dilemma.
But watch out for the theocrats in your party. They want to put you to death!
And have no fear I’ll be around to see the Republicans become totally irrelevant for another generation – after all they’re their own worst enemy.
leftist –
You beat me to it. Child Support has always been regarded by the courts as a means of ensuring the support of the child, not an award to the mother based upon fault (or lack thereof). But of course, the check has to be written to the mother. I cannot tell you how many times I’ve heard a man complain that he doesn’t think the money is really spent on the child, but instead supports the mother’s (choose one): partying, deadbeat boyfriend, drug habit, shopping habit, drinking habit, new car, etc. etc.
Really, this is a situation where every kid at puberty has to be taught “Caveat Emptor” (i.e., let the ****** beware). Don’t believe anything any potential sexual liason tells you. Assume that they have a fatal venerial disease and are capable of producting children at any time, unless an independent lab certifies otherwise.
proud leftist,
I don’t view this as a question. I view this a statement for women to assume the repsonsibility that goes with reproductive choices. If a woman is in the situation described and chooses to continue the pregnancy, then the financial responsibility is hers. The family courts have been anti-male long enough. We all want equal rights for women, but those rights come with responsibiities.
My wife had surgery back in September, and we just finished paying off the bills. Our portion really wasn’t that much (compared with the whole bill), I’m lucky to have some pretty good employer-paid health insurance.
But one thing keeps bothering us. Our insurance statements all have a column where there is a substantial reduction in the bill. The explanitory note says that this is due to an “agreemenent between the provider and the PPO/Insurance Company”. In other words, the Hospital/Doctor agrees to lower fees in order to be a part of the “Preferred Provider” system. The difference in amounts is frequently 20/30% of the bill, in one bill it was almost half.
So what happens to the 20/30% of the bill? That amount gets picked up by people who don’t have insurance, in higher doctor or hospital bills. In effect, it is a surcharge on people who don’t have insurance or who have bad insurance.
Example (one bill, numbers rounded): So, with my good insurance, a $1,800 bill was reduced to $1,200, of which I paid 10% or $120 and the insurance company paid $1,080. Someone who cannot afford insurance would have to pay the full $1,800. Do we need much more evidence that the system is broken?
You might want to read a good article on the current state of the Health Care/Insurance system:
http://www.nybooks.com/articles/18802
Libertarian,
Again, I tend to agree with your sentiments. Consider, however, a situation in which the woman is incapable of supporting the child on her own, so turns to DSHS or whatever for support. Who should be responsible for supporting that child if the father is incapable of doing so–DSHS or him? As rhp6033 points out above, you stick your dick in a chick of childbearing age, no matter what she’s told you about her fertility, and there’s a certain element of caveat emptor. I’m going to hold the father responsible.
Actually rhp, I am pretty sure that unless they are rich, uninsured would be charged on a sliding scale and pay that same $120 ish that you did. As far as I can tell, that $1800 is on par with the sticker price on new cars. Its there so they can negotiate the full $1080.
proud leftist,
I’ve seen too many guys get raked over the coals financially to support your view. But having a forum to dicuss them is what these blogs are about. So, we differ on our opinions, but that’s good for the discussion. You opinion is valid.
GBS THE NAVY WASHOUT. WHAT NO ANSWERS THOUGHT NOT.NOT ONLY ARE YOU A WASHOUT YOUR A COWARD TO BOOT.TELL US WHAT SHIPS YOU WERE ON OH THE USS NEVERSAIL.YOU ARE A LOSER ATTACK OTHER PEOPLE BUT DONT HAVE THE BALLS TO TELL THIS BLOG HOW YOU WASHED OUT OF THE NAVY.LOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOSER
proud leftist,
I may have sounded high-and-mighty at the end of my last post, but I didn’t intend to do so. Sorry. Here’s a compromise: how about we consider each individual case? For this guy, Matt Dubay, he was obviously worked by a con artist, and now she’s trying to cash-in on the poor guy. The family courts have given these con artist women too much in many instances. As much as some of the ardent femiists want to believe, men are not villians in each and every case involving a woman and an unplanned pregnancy. So, let’s let the courts decide when a woman is running a con and deal with the situation accordingly by NOT rewarding her bad behavior.
Libertarian,
Courts should approach every case on its individual merits. Judges with an agenda or an ax to grind do not belong on the bench. The trouble with Dubay’s case, as with so many cases, is that no easy answer is necessarily apparent. I don’t think any of us want to reward a skank for duplicitous behavior. On the other hand, I want her child to be reasonably supported. So, the judge gets handed a tough balancing act. By the way, I do think courts have become a bit less slanted toward mothers. I know fathers who have sought and been awarded custody. A generation ago, such an outcome was almost unheard of.
Roger Rabbit:
I’m glad I was able to post before you today. Here’s your favorite story.
Enjoy!!
How to catch a Conservative in the act of lying:
Note the date/time stamps.
http://www.horsesass.org/index.php?p=1332
108, Libertarian, I never attended flight school. Hence, I never “washed out”. All a figment of GBS’s vivid “imagination”. All my training was done in Newport, RI and Coronado, Ca, as well as the old Philadelphia Ship Yard. Then, three WESTPACs of 6 monthe each , one ten month IO cruise, and a tour in Coronado at the NAB. Four years at sea, and two ashore.
Comment by Myron [JCH] Silverstein, ESQ— 2/24/06 @ 3:04 pm
@ 123
JCH: Are you saying GWB served in combat then? Just askin’
Comment by windie — 1/24/06 @ 3:59 pm [No, but, Windie, have YOU ever “buckled up” in a Mach 2 F-106? Not for pussies. I washed out of Naval Air [bad GI] and served Surface Line [1110]. Flying [and training] in military jets are not for the Bill Clintons of the world.]
Comment by JCH — 1/24/06 @ 4:37 pm
It just never gets old outing a fucking lying conservative. BTW, where is the AWOL liar?
Dumb Ass Wash Out @ 13:
YOU ARE A LOSER ATTACK OTHER PEOPLE BUT DONT HAVE THE BALLS TO TELL THIS BLOG HOW YOU WASHED OUT OF THE NAVY.
You have me confused with the Lying Tard JCH, who WASHED-OUT of flight school but lied about it and tried to make me out as the person lying.
Please read my post at 16 to clear up ANY confusion you may have. If you need help with the big words go upstairs and ask your mommy. I bet the basement is cold today, isn’t it?
PS: See if you can learn to spell too.
NOT ONLY ARE YOU A WASHOUT YOUR A COWARD TO BOOT.
The word bolded word, “your” is a possessive word. Like: “That’s YOUR problem.” You want to use the contraction word, you’re. It’s two words combined together: “you” and “are.” Note the apostrophe, it replaces the space and the letter “a”.
Do you think you can remember this?
Like I said keep on postin’ retard. You do more than your fair share to prove the base of the conservative right is under educated.
Dick suck.
OK, JCH was the guy that washed out of Navy flight school, later serving on ships, right? And GSB was a Navy seal, right?
With all this back-and-forth, I’ve lost track of who’s who!
INTERIOR SECRETARY RESIGNS
The Associated Press reports that Interior Secretary Gale Norton resigned today, effective March 31, “at a time when her agency is part of a lobbying scandal over Indian gaming licenses.”
John McCain and Byron Dorgan, the ranking Republican and Democratic members of the Senate Indian Affairs Committee, both have said that “e-mails uncovered by the committee show that Steven Griles, Norton’s former deputy, had a close relationship with Abramoff. Another one-time Norton associate, Italia Federici, helped Abramoff gain access to Griles in exchange for contributions from Abramoff’s Indian tribe clients.”
Norton was “one of the architects” of Bush’s energy policy, which involves opening government lands to more oil and gas drilling, including the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge.
Norton indicated she wants to do something in the private sector.
For complete story, see http://articles.news.aol.com/n.....38;cid=842
Sounds like Norton wants to leave before (a) she’s indicted, and (b) Bush has to pick a successor he can get confirmed by a Democrat-controlled Senate.
ITALY’S RIGHT-WING LEADER FACES BRIBERY INDICTMENT
“ROME (March 10) – Prosecutors in Milan said Friday they have requested that Italian Premier Silvio Berlusconi be indicted on charges of corruption.
T
“he premier is accused of ordering at least $600,000 paid to British lawyer David Mills – whose indictment also was being sought – in 1997 in exchange for the lawyer’s false testimony in two trials against Berlusconi.”
Berlusconi, an ultra-wealthy media magnate, next to Britain’s Tony Blair has been Europe’s most steadfast supporter of Bush’s Iraq war policies.
For complete story, see http://articles.news.aol.com/n.....8;cid=2194
BUSH RATINGS HIT NEW LOW
“Nearly 70 Percent Say Country Headed in Wrong Direction
“By RON FOURNIER, AP
“WASHINGTON (March 10) – More and more Americans, particularly Republicans, disapprove of President George W. Bush’s performance, question his character and no longer consider him a strong leader against terrorism, according to an AP-Ipsos poll documenting one of the bleakest points of his presidency. …
“Nearly 70 percent of people say the U.S. is on the wrong track, a 6-point jump since February. …
“Republican Party leaders said the survey explains why Republican lawmakers are rushing to distance themselves from Bush on a range of issues – port security, immigration, spending, warrantless eavesdropping and trade, for example.
“The positioning is most intense among Republicans facing election in November and those considering the 2008 presidential campaigns. …
“The poll suggests that most Americans wonder whether Bush is up to the job. The survey, conducted Monday through Wednesday of 1,000 people, found that just 37 percent approve of his overall performance. That is the lowest of his presidency.
“Bush’s job approval among Republicans plummeted from 82 percent in February to 74 percent, a dangerous sign in a midterm election year when parties rely on enthusiasm from their most loyal voters. The biggest losses were among white males.”
For complete story, see http://articles.news.aol.com/n.....38;cid=771
4
“I support Mr. Dubay. Commentby Libertarian— 3/10/06@ 10:05 am”
You are an idiot! A complete, total, fucking idiot! You’re so hung up about the father’s rights that you’ve completely lost sight of the child’s rights!
Once the child is here, it doesn’t matter how it got here, it still has to be supported. If the parents don’t support it, then taxpayers must. Do you want a massive expansion of welfare spending on dependent kids because of laws that excuse fathers from paying support? Have you deluded yourself into thinking single mothers can support children by themselves?
If Mr. Dubay needs a legal remedy, then let him sue the mother for fraud. Let him collect his judgment from the mother’s income and assets, if she has any. But don’t take it from the child.
Why do you want to punish the child for what the mother did? Why do you want to take the child’s property to compensate the father for what the mother did? (Under law, child support is the property of the child, not the property of the custodial parent.)
You make no sense.
Libertatian @ 18:
OK, JCH was the guy that washed out of Navy flight school, later serving on ships, right? And GSB was a Navy seal, right?
With all this back-and-forth, I’ve lost track of who’s who!
That’s sort of right. JCH is the guy who washed out of Navy flight school and LIED about it and I was the SEAL.
OK, now it reads correctly.
I have a better idea. Mr. Dubay can punish his dick by cutting it off. A side benefit of this method is that it guarantees he won’t have this problem again.
Hey Richard, I know this isn’t the first time you’ve filed a frivolous complaint with the PDC. Would you like to enlighten us with your PDC scorecard?
You know, something like this:
PDC: 8 (or whatever it is)
Richard Pope: 0
5
Proud Leftist: You are on the right track. Our child support laws are simple, and easy to understand:
Parents are legally responsible for supporting their children, regardless of why the children were born.
Now, it should go without saying, that parents are also MORALLY responsible for supporting their children — which raises the question, why has Libertarian lost his moral compass? Why is he so blind to the MORAL aspect of a parent’s obligations to his/her child that he can even conceive of excusing ANY parent from supporting his/her child for ANY reason?
Is this merely emblematic of the right’s total moral collapse, of their total disconnect from ethics and decency, as has been in so much evidence over the last 5 years? I’m tempted to think so.
So if I poke a girl that is 15…but she said she was 18…I should get off w/o charges cause she lied?
Bush’s job approval among Republicans plummeted from 82 percent in February to 74 percent, a dangerous sign in a midterm election year when parties rely on enthusiasm from their most loyal voters. The biggest losses were among white males.
Not looking too good for the wingnuts and the Bush dead-enders is it?
They’ll try to dole out more pork before November but the foreigners are buying less Treasury debt which is really scary.
So now they’re trying to sell American assets like the ports and public lands to keep China, Japan and OPEC rolling over their dollars into treasury debt.
Anything but taxing the rich, anything. Anything to keep the charade going in Iraq which is now a launch point for Iran.
Comment on 7
Under Washington law, child support is considered the property of the child, which the custodial parent receives “in trust” to be spent for the benefit of the child. In theory, if the parent spends the money for something else, the child can sue the parent for the support from which it was wrongfully deprived. This cause of action, however, lies with the child not the parent who paid the support.
For years, father’s rights groups have sought legislation that would require custodial parents to provide an accounting on demand for how the support money was spent. The Washington legislature passed such a law, but Gov. Locke vetoed it.
There are several objections to this approach. First, it imposes cumbersome accounting tasks on custodial parents. Second, many parents lack the bookkeeping skills to do it. Third, it’s a non-problem that doesn’t need a solution, because the custodial parent — short of putting the child out on the curb — really has no choice but to pay for shelter, food, and the child’s other needs from whatever resources are available. Fourth, where a household has multiple children with different fathers, the law permits commingling the various support payments into a common fund and pooling the children’s expenses, because it’s impractical and economically inefficient to pay the children’s expenses separately. They all live under the same roof, for example, and the household has only one heating bill, only one garbage bill, etc., which is spread over all the household members.
There are plenty of apocrophyal about custodial parents spending the support checks in bars or on drugs, and without question, such cases occur (although they’re not as common as whining fathers would have you believe). This issue is not being ignored, it is the ongoing subject of intense study by social workers, lawyers, children’s advocates, parents’ advocates, legislators, etc. There is no “magic bullet” solution, but except for fathers trying to rationalize not paying their support obligations, there is NO SUPPORT for dealing with this issue by excusing parents from paying their legal and moral obligation to support their children.
Proposed remedies include punitive action against the mother, such as holding her in contempt of court (but how do you punish that? by throwing her in jail? then who takes care of the kids?), or in extreme cases taking the children away from her (which is appropriate in cases of neglect, abuse, or where the mother is a drunk or a drug addict).
Believe me, this issue is being worked on, and the answer probably is the court system has to deal with it on a case-by-case basis. The guiding legal principle is that the court must act in the child’s best interests, and what the parents want is subordinate to what is best for the child. That is as it should be, and that part of our law should not change.
8
“If a woman is in the situation described and chooses to continue the pregnancy, then the financial responsibility is hers. Commentby Libertarian— 3/10/06@ 11:11 am”
This view is morally unsound.
9
You have pointed out merely one of many problems in our private health care system. The for-profit sector has failed miserably at providing affordable health care for our citizens. But that’s only the beginning.
Recently, the news media reported that a well-known Seattle hospital routinely overcharges patients. Those who squawk get the improper charges, or inflated charges, or “mistakes” removed from their bill. The naive and trusting get ripped off.
I have COBRA insurance through an employer provided by private insurance organizations. I have learned through experience to comb through EVERY bill, because they are full of mistakes and overcharges. In fact, I can almost take it for granted that I am being overcharged, and I almost always have to spend a considerable amount of time on the phone straightening it out. Because, you see, the insurer doesn’t pay for the “mistakes” and overbillings — they ALWAYS show up in the “patient responsibility” column of the bill, 100% of the time, trust me on this.
In other words, our problem as consumers is not just that medical care is expensive. The providers are CROOKS who are not content to merely inflate their charges; on top of it, they commit CONSUMER FRAUD against us!
The odds of getting ripped off are so high, that in my case at least, the near-certainty of a billing hassle has become a deterrent to going to the doctor. I simply don’t seek medical care anymore until I’m so sick that I have no choice. Then I let them haul me off in an ambulance, thinking that if I survive, I’ll deal with the billing department thieves later.
It didn’t use to be this way, but it has been this way for a long time now. It has been at least 25 years, probably closer to 35 years, since I dealt with an honest medical billing department.
Our system of paying for health care is terminally broken. Nearly a fifth of our population has no health insurance, and another fourth gets their health care at taxpayer expense. Meanwhile, a growing flood of employers is abandoning health benefits for their workers. And a jobless economy is growing the ranks of the unemployed and insolvent. In short, the employer-based health care system is collapsing.
Bush’s response to this? Deny access to bankruptcy courts to insolvent victims of medical debts so that they become lifetime debtors with no avenue of escape.
Actually, Bush’s approach is probably the fastest and surest way of enacting socialized health care in America, because if you abuse enough people long enough, they will revolt against the existing system. You can count on it.
Fidel Castro has a health care system that works. We don’t. That’s quite a monument to the glories of capitalism and free markets.
The truth is, there is no free market in health care, either in this country or any other. When you are wheeled into a hospital on a litter, you are in no position to bargain over the price of the services about to be rendered to you. Hell, the doctors don’t even allow you to refuse their services! As a practical matter, your financial health is hostage to the doctor’s opinion of what is medically necessity. We regulate what public utilities can charge because they are monopolies. Hospitals are monopolies, too, and the case for regulating what they can charge patients is just as strong.
Roger, who pissed in your corn flakes this morning?
Raoger Rabbit,
If your brains were gasoline, you wouldn’t have enough gas to drive a pissant’s motorcycle half way around a BB! Libertarian points out an obvious flaw in the system against me.
10
“Libertarian, Again, I tend to agree with your sentiments. Commentby proud leftist— 3/10/06@ 11:24 am”
Well I don’t, and we part company on this issue, PL. Nobody made the man fuck the woman. Fucking is a voluntary activity, and involves assumption of financial risk. It’s that simple.
If the man really wants to protect his pocketbook, nothing stops him from getting a vasectomy. Making sure he doesn’t incur a child support liability is his responsibility, not hers.
Alternatively, if he keeps his pants zipped, he won’t have this problem.
Where the hell is the “personal responsibility” that Republicans like to talk about? It seems to disappear whenever military service or child support is involved. It’s nothing but empty talk.
12
“I’ve seen too many guys get raked over the coals financially … Commentby Libertarian— 3/10/06@ 11:37 am”
Really? Have you priced children recently?
Here’s a couple statistics for you, Lib. Half of all parents are not paying their legal support obligations at all, and of the half who are, only half of what they owe is being paid. In other words, America’s custodial parents are receiving only about one-fourth of what courts have ordered to be paid to them.
The fathers you feel so sorry for should be thankful they aren’t mothers.
The bottom line is, fathers are ripping off mothers. Go whine somewhere else.
You need another issue to whine about, Lib, because you’re not gonna get any traction from this one.
Roger @ 36
I’m most surely not alone among males in having experienced that special phenomenon when the needs of the ‘nads trump rational thought. But, sometimes reason does play a role in deciding who we screw–a lot of us might be far more inclined to sleep with the gal who says she can’t get pregnant than the one who makes no representation at all. I personally am going to feel some sympathy for the poor fuck who gets sued for child support by a woman who told him she was infertile. And, I would not look terribly kindly on the woman. I would consider her to have committed a moral transgression. On the other hand, I’m not going to punish the child by denying child support.
14
“For this guy, Matt Dubay, he was obviously worked by a con artist, and now she’s trying to cash-in on the poor guy. The family courts have given these con artist women too much in many instances. As much as some of the ardent femiists want to believe, men are not villians in each and every case involving a woman and an unplanned pregnancy. So, let’s let the courts decide when a woman is running a con and deal with the situation accordingly by NOT rewarding her bad behavior. Commentby Libertarian— 3/10/06@ 11:51 am”
In the first place, you’ve chosen to believe Mr. DuBay without hearing the mother’s side of the story.
Secondly, you are naive. Prosecutors and government attorneys who work with child support cases can tell you that fathers resisting paying support have as many excuses and rationalizations as criminal defendants do. And like criminals, their version of the story should be taken with a ton of salt. That’s the way human nature is.
Third, your shabby attempt to excuse deadbeat dads by trying to paint mothers as male-hating feminists has no basis in fact. It’s a smear, pure and simple. There is no ideology involved in expecting fathers to contribute to their children’s financial support. Rent, food, clothing, and medical care cost a lot of money. Very few single parents are affluent enough to pay these expenses by themselves without contribution from either the other parent or taxpayers. The whole reason we have a large and expensive governmental child support enforcement system in this country is because (a) the honor system didn’t work and a very high percentage — over 90% — of parents failed to voluntarily support their children, and (b) the result of society’s failure to enforce the parental support duty was that taxpayers had to pay billions of dollars every year to support strangers’ children, and the outlay kept growing exponentially.
Fourth, your focus on the parents is misplaced. Our focus should be on the children. No matter what the father or mother did, the child is innocent, and your proposed solutions all come at the expense of the child. You would victimize the child for the parent’s perceived or alleged misdeeds. That’s morally wrong. Furthermore, our laws don’t sanction that approach. There’s nothing wrong with our laws, but there’s plenty wrong with your thinking.
Fifth, if you think having to raise a child and chase after the father for support is a “reward” for “bad behavior,” you have your head completely up your ass. Likewise with respect to your silly assumption that somehow women are more capable of thinking about the future and “planning” to become a parent in the middle of the sex act. You are an idiot. No, you are stupid, ignorant, chauvinist idiot.
Clarification
“(a) the honor system didn’t work and a very high percentage – over 90% – of non-custodial parents failed to voluntarily support their children,”
18
“OK, JCH was the guy that washed out of Navy flight school, later serving on ships, right? And GSB was a Navy seal, right? With all this back-and-forth, I’ve lost track of who’s who! Commentby Libertarian— 3/10/06@ 12:25 pm”
Yeah, I think that’s correct, but this doesn’t address DAWO’s status. The only thing I can say for sure about Dumb Ass Wash Out is that he’s not a dead hero.
29
“So if I poke a girl that is 15…but she said she was 18…I should get off w/o charges cause she lied? Commentby Pablo— 3/10/06@ 1:06 pm”
My professional legal advice is that you won’t be so lucky.
34
“Roger, who pissed in your corn flakes this morning? Commentby Yossarian— 3/10/06@ 1:40 pm”
Reality taste a little salty to you?
Roger, are you really a woman masquerading as a rabbit? Your recent post sound a lot more like a woman than a man.
35
“Raoger Rabbit, If your brains were gasoline, you wouldn’t have enough gas to drive a pissant’s motorcycle half way around a BB! Libertarian points out an obvious flaw in the system against me. Commentby Sigmund Freud— 3/10/06@ 1:42 pm”
I’m glad to hear the system is against you. I’m sure you’ve got it coming.
43
“I’m most surely not alone among males in having experienced that special phenomenon when the needs of the ‘nads trump rational thought.”
Harummph. Nobody understands that better than, uh, a rabbit.
As my Granny was wont to say “A stiff (one) knows no conscience, nor thought for the ‘morrow.” She was also on record as saying “A wet(one) knows no rules, and will jump the back fence in an instant.”
The law is there to pick up the pieces (hmmm) after the trainwreck.
43
But let’s not lose sight of the fact that using this as an excuse to avoid the responsibilities that flow from what is fundamentally volitional behavior is a slippery slope. If you can use this reasoning to avoid paying child support, then you can also use it to justify rape.
43
“I personally am going to feel some sympathy for the poor fuck who gets sued for child support by a woman who told him she was infertile. And, I would not look terribly kindly on the woman. I would consider her to have committed a moral transgression. On the other hand, I’m not going to punish the child by denying child support.”
Your suggestion is? Burn her at the stake? I have a better idea — let HIM raise the kid. Of course, that will only compound his problems, but what the hell …
BTW, like Goldy is now, I was a custodial parent of a 9-year-old girl. The separation lasted over 2 years while Mrs. Rabbit and I worked out some, um, glitches in our relationship and I raised our offspring by myself during that time. So, my knowledge of single parenthood is NOT theoretical.
I will add that, whatever Mrs. Rabbit’s problems were, I never thought they could be solved by throwing her in jail, fining her, or abandoning her to care for the child by herself without financial support for me. As it turned out, she couldn’t take care of the child, so it fell to me to do so — without financial support from her or DSHS.
Unlike some people on this board, I never believed Baby Bunny got her by herself with no help from me, and I didn’t have to cogitate about whether to accept responsibility for raising and supporting Baby Bunny. It was a no-brainer. I didn’t even have to think about it, my rabbit instincts told me what to do. But then, unlike you humans, God didn’t burden me with a human brain and all its subtleties. All I have is a little instinct wheel that goes round and round. I don’t have to work at it like you do. The wheel tells me what to do.
49
“Roger, are you really a woman masquerading as a rabbit? Your recent post sound a lot more like a woman than a man. Commentby Sigmund Freud— 3/10/06@ 2:19 pm”
You are an idiot! I am a male human pretending to be a rabbit.
Let me add, Freud, that your theory that all human behavior can be explained away by sexual drive is fucked up. You are an idiot! And aren’t you supposed to be dead?
Maybe you’d like to explain how sex makes us eat … I eat because I’m hungry, not because I’m horny! You are an idiot!
Well, folks, Ms. Roger Rabbit has just about shot her wad for the day. Maybe just a couple more mindless rants and she’ll be done for the day.
Treefarmer @ 52
Your grandmother was an insightful woman.
Roger @ 53
Agreed. Horniness never actually knocks out volition and never justifies wrongful acts. It does, however, sometimes explain stupid decisions. The term “Coyote Mornings” comes to mind.
61
Okay, go fuck Freud if it makes you happy. I don’t care. Go fuck http://www.msu.edu/~nixonjos/a.....-unger.jpg if it makes you happy. I don’t care …
62
“It does, however, sometimes explain stupid decisions.”
It sometimes explains some stupid decisions. It never explains all stupid decisions. For example, I don’t see how you can blame voting Republican on sexual impulse. Well, not more than 50% of the time, anyway, because at least half of all Republicans are sexless.
Maybe they’re against sex because they’re afraid of sex.
They sure seem to talk about sex a lot, though. And an awful lot of them seem to like porn and kiddie sex.
7 OUT OF 10 BELIEVE GOP IS CORRUPT
In a new on-line poll, 71% of respondents answered “yes” to the question, “Is the Republican Party corrupt?”
http://www.popularq.com/survey.....SuS1S49663
RR,
I think they’re against sex because they’re not human. They’re a race of automotons who detect that sex is pleasurable for humans, so they want to eradicate the act. They’re against anything that causes human pleasure, and for anything (war, corporate exploitation, restricted access to medical care, trashing of the environment) that causes human suffering.
Well the rethugs tried a move that reminds us of the old Soviet style government but in the end, the good guys won!
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/11767241/
“GBS Update: He has been driven from HorsesAss like a Muslim from a Pork Bar-B-Q!!!!!
Comment by REV Jesse [JCH] Jackson — 2/24/06 @ 10:54 am
Any one seen the liar. Pretty ironic, isn’t it?
@ 69:
I sort of see the similarities between Bush and Hitler, but for my money, I see more similarities between Bush and Bin Laden. Both want one-party, theocratic rule.
Why didn’t this woman just have herself artificially inseminated? It sure would have been more ethical than lying to some dude so she could get pregnant and stick him with the bill for raising the kid. Jeez, if you’re going to be a slug, at least do it on your own dime!
GBS – Congrats on taking down that racist, knee-jerk reactionary JCH. You mopped the floor with that low-life.
the only floor gbs mopped was in the brig.gbs why dont you tell us why you got booted out of the navy.
68
You’ve got a point! I’ve long suspected Republicans are alien life forms intent on taking over Earth, and that Bush’s presidency is the beginning of a “War of the Worlds” scenario.
69, 71
They remind me of the Old Trotskyites, which is not surprising, given that Neocon ideology comes from Trotsky.
72
Why didn’t he cut off his dick and save himself all this trouble?
72
Hell, he didn’t even have to cut it off, all he had to do was keep it parked in his Fruit of the Looms.
I never ceased to be amazed at the rationalizations human males come up with to dodge responsibility for the natural and predictable consequences of fucking human females.
God invented fucking to make BABIES, you idiots!
Sheesh. They should let rabbits run the world.
Then there would be lots of BUNNIES!!! :D :D :D :D :D :D :D :D :D
74
Hey DUMB ASS WASH OUT, what kind of SHIP did you serve on? Did you row the lifeboat?
HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR
HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR
HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR
HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR
HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR
Cyn @ 67, Pud @ 104, yerterday’s thread (I have a life, and don’t stick to this)-
Here’s the comment I was responding to.
“Pretend Seattle is not built on a LIQUEFACTION ZONE”
Note the lack of reference to AWV. Also note Cyn was responding to comments about wells’ work as a carpenter. Presumably not on the viaduct.
And why do I owe you a resume, with scholastic credentials? Do you intend to start sending me a check?
Sorry if you can’t handle being called out on your ignorance.
Clueless # 73, looks like you spoke to soon, looks like GBS missed the Dipshit Asshole WingNUT Orangutang @ 74 (no offense intended to Orangutangs where ever you are)
@83
Actually, Roger, he claims to have served on the USS Ranger. I do not doubt it, as a claim made with convincing evidence deserves acquiescence. I have no idea what he has done since, so fire away…
Lifeboat? We don’t need no stinking lifeboat…(sorry, Mel)
Yet ANOTHER Republican crook gets busted!
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/11770707/
LauraBushKilledAGuy@87
Allen was the No. 2 official in the Health and Human Services Department when Bush nominated him in April 2003 to the 4th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in Richmond, Va. Bush nominated him to the court again a year later, but Allen never received a Senate vote.
What is your point? Based on the above, there is none…
The poll suggests that most Americans wonder whether Bush is up to the job. The survey, conducted Monday through Wednesday of 1,000 people, found that just 37 percent approve of his overall performance. That is the lowest of his presidency.
You donks and your lying polls. Donk sure like to make
themselves feel good.
Hey donks, what do you think of state right now
http://seattletimes.nwsource.c.....ion10.html
God bless South Dakota.
Like I said, Yet ANOTHER Republican crook gets busted!
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/11770707/
I’ve long suspected Republicans are alien life forms intent on taking over Earth,
Certainly describes DOOFUS and that pod person doing petty thefts in Target – an adviser to Bush – what a laugh!
marks @ 88
What part of Allen being a domestic advisor to the President until he was forced to resign because of his criminal activities in January do you not understand?
http://www.slate.com/id/2137895/
Rufus @ 88:
And your proof that the poll is incorrect is what again? Oh, that’s right, you have none. Sucks to be you.
Rufus @ 89:
Hey donks, what do you think of state right now
I think state good. Why you talk like caveman?
Shame a state like North Dakota doesn’t trust a woman to make her own decisions about her body though. But I guess it is normal for the Republican Nanny State to think they have to impose on personal autonomy.
Rufus:
Given your insightful discussion of polling, I was wondering if you want to tell me how the Earth is Flat, Christine Gregoire is not Governor, I don’t have to pay income tax, or how the Free Masons run the world?
I think they’ve started work on the GW Bush Presidential Library. It will be in Texas and it will be the smallest Presidential Library ever built. It will house the sum total of books read by Bush, one! The title? You guessed it – My Pet Goat!
Roger, you make sense regarding a man keeping his pants zipped. Best way to stop pregnancies. So why are you don’t you support school systems telling the chirren to do the same? Do you remember your commentary on the subject or is the little brain wondering what type of “bunny” support you’ll be paying for the Greenlake spawn?
Horseless Looselips: Do you and your NEA idiot cronies support telling boys and girls to keep their pants zipped?
Why didn’t you moonbats hold Gary Locke’s feet to the fire on that veto where children could sue their parents? Maybe the trial lawyers got to him? So Roger, how come you didn’t demand a no confidence vote on Guvnur Locke?
Bullshit Roger, some fathers are ripping off the mothers. But here we don’t have to worry about windie or boeing bob. They will only rip off each other.
Other fathers have their wages garnished by their employer, court ordered payments sent to the court, or court ordered payments sent to the woman’s lawyer. I love it when the shoe is on the other foot and the woman has to pay child support because she was the career person. Ever seen the NOW freaks go ballistic? Stay tuned to the next woman pays and read between the lines!
Why do you like to act so holier than thou here on ASSes? Ever been involved in a child custody case? Do you speak from experience or are you make those “dumb bunny” generalizations again? I thought your expertise was bullshitting?
Uhhh Roger posts 57 & 58 make no sense. Either you are a human retired lawyer or you are a complete fuckup thinking you are some dumb bunny? From your many contradictory statements on ASSes, my poll is this:
Roger Rabbit is:
[ ] A man
[ ] A man who claimed to be a lawyer
[ ] A dumb bunny
[ ] A dumb bunny claiming to be a lawyer
[ ] Delusional
[ ] A Delusional man claiming to be a lawyer
[ ] A Delusional dumb bunny claiming to be a lawyer
[ ] All of the above.
My selection is [X] Delusional
Roger, I see later you have some experience in child care. Good for you. Since you were the primary caregiver, what experience do you claim mishandling the childcare?
I watched my brother have his wages garnished by some woman judge (she was probably sitting on her vibrator on her bench) because he lived in NYC and the ex and the son moved back to Phila. He sent $200/week in the 70s and it increased with inflation in the late 70s (Jimmy Carter) and stabilized in the 80s. When he saw his son for his bi-weekly weekend visit, he was always dressed raggedly. When he came to our wedding he was asked where was his good shoes? I distinctly remember his response. “Mom didn’t buy them”. My sister bought him new shoes. Been there seen it!
Roger Rabbit @80: I agree 1000% with your comment “God invented fucking to make BABIES, you idiots!”
Yes, I love heterosexual fucking! If God invented fucking to make babies, how do gays make babies? Why do you support an act that has no conclusion?
Marks@86, Roger Rabbit has no memory. He forgot what I do for a living, what DAWO did, what YO did. Maybe he is a rabbit after all, masquerading as a librul pile of human…_____________ You fill it in!
Foghorn Freephorn @ all
You’ve so brainwashed by wingnut propaganda it’s pathetic.
Why do you support an act that has no conclusion?
When Goldy gets the new software – your reign of error will be concluded. I certainly support THAT act. You can then excercise your first ammendment rights from (un)SP.
CluelessASS: Why are you against the first amendment? Oh that’s right, you be a librul.
Reign of terror. HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA. Now that’s a funny one!
An CluelessASS: I guess you get a pass in Post#1 cuz you be a librul. You see I too am against teenagers getting fucking intimate. That’s for later in life. Yet, in your nanometerscopic mind, I guess when a child gets a hardon you say he’s ready for fucking. You see there is a big difference between fucking and love making. How can a teenager portent he or she is in love when they haven’t experienced anything yet except the abuse from a librul parent? Wake up and see life.
If I remember, you said you were around 30 with two children. I have no idea if you have a girl but let’s assume so. She comes home at 13 and says: “My clueless father, I lost my virginity today. God it hurt but he later ate my pussy and I got a male induced orgasm. Clueless daddy, it felt so good that I’m gonna fuck behind your back!” So if that’s the case cluelessASS how would you feel knowing your daughter has chosen to be a nympho slut? Oh… that’s right she’s the offspring of a librul, she can do anything she wants! Well in my case I told both sons, no premarital sex is off limits. You have no idea what love is and grow into your body and mind. Check out what God’s creation has in store for you. When you find the right one God will let you know!
That’s the big difference between you and me cluelessASS. I parent my children. Libruls let them run wild. Just go to a restaurant and watch the wild children. Ask the parents are you a librul and listen carefully. You’ll probably see them exit to their car with Kerry/Edwards stickers on the bumpers.
GBS, how would you react if your daughters did what I suggested above? I bet you’d knock some sense into them. Oops… there would be a call to DSHS for child abuse from one of cluelessASS’ buddies.
Erratum: no premarital sex is off limits should say no premarital sex; it’s off limits. Sorry for confusing you cluelessASS!
Foghorn Freephorn @ 107
Sketch it out a little more FF – you’d make a great porno short story writer! Or maybe you’ve been thumbing through the dirty books on the internets on lonely nights on the road?
I’m a parent and I practice setting limits on my kids behavior. You’re completely wrong about the parents of “wild kids” – just look at the Red States – highest rates of abortion and STD’s around. Listen to the country music Foghorn Freephorn – DEEVORCE, alcoholism and adultery are the main themes – the soundtrack to Red State, “Right-thinking” life.
106
I said reign of ERROR. Can’t you read freep?
And I love the first ammendment!
I’d die for your right to practice it! – that is, at (un)SP or any other wingnut hangout.
Oh…Pee-Poopy…the brother from another gene pool…is still trolling!
BWAAAAAK!
And one more thing Freephorn – it’s dirty-minded crap like you spewed in 107 is why I’m looking forward to seeing Goldy shut you down.
Take your carnival show to (un)SP and see how Stefan Minnow likes it.
Correction – not Goldy but the Community shutting you down! And I’m part of the community!
Ta, ta Freephorn! You can scream at us over the “internets” from (un)SP!
Rufus @ 88:
And your proof that the poll is incorrect is what again? Oh, that’s right, you have none. Sucks to be you.
Remeber the 2004 election when all the donk pollsters got it wrong. That is proof to me. Most of these polls are from lying leftist MSM outfits like CBS. CBS lies have been “donkumented”.
You lefties have terrible memories. I am always having to remind you of events from a short time ago.
clueless-
You seem overjoyed at the idea of “shutting down” opposing points of view. Let’s see, what famous people does that remind us of???? Hmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmm?
You also want to shut down Aaron Dixon. You are a piece of shit racist Clueless. At least Dixon has the courage of his convictions. You cannot even stand up in a battle of words you pathetic dickwad.
Clueless is the type who screams about his “rights”….and screams when others exercise theirs.
Hmmmmmmmmmmmm?
Shame a state like North Dakota doesn’t trust a woman to make her own decisions about her body though. But I guess it is normal for the Republican Nanny State to think they have to impose on personal autonomy.
Commentby JDB— 3/10/06@ 10:45 pm
Whoaa. Donks are now rewriting history as it unfolds. It is South Dakota numb nuts.
Oink @ 115
Get off that Dixon talking point idiot. I could give two sh*ts about his skin color. A vote for Dixon is a vote for McGavick, the overpaid candidate of the insurance industry. Period – end of story.
As for your first ammendment rights – go practice them at (un)SP. I support your right to spew your nonsense over there. The free-for-all here was fun for a while but now it’s a lot of heat and no light. Change happens – deal with it.
You can return now to your same-sex ecstasies Oink. Due to the wise judgement of Sandra Day O’Connor you have a right to that as well absent sodomy laws.
Whoaa. Donks are now rewriting history as it unfolds. It is South Dakota numb nuts.
Commentby RUFUS— 3/11/06@ 11:26 am
Good point RUFUS.
clueless rants:
“Get off that Dixon talking point idiot. I could give two sh*ts about his skin color.”
I care about Dixon’s “skin color”. He is black and has enough guts to not be taken for granted by closet racists like YOU!
You want Dixon to fit into YOUR profile of N—-R!
Act all oppressed and beholding, sit back and support whoever you annoint!!
Eat Sh*t clueless. Ain’t gonna happen. You are gonna see more & more 3rd Party’s on the Left & Right as they get sick of the same old Bullshit.
The very minute amount of brain matter you have remaining clueless that hasn’t been chemically altered should be used to recognize the times they are a changin’.
Blacks no longer need to suck up to closet racist Whities like you a$$hole.
So, Rufus, we at least agree that which ever Dakota passed the bill, that it shows that they are a nanny state who doesn’t trust women? You are smarter than you write. What you think state right now?
And I know proof and facts are not that important to you, but lets look at some.
http://www.realclearpolitics.c.....kerry.html
RCP had the final average of 50.0% for Bush, 48.5% for Kerry and 1.5% for Nader.
Every poll except two had it for Bush or a tie (the two that didn’t were Marist and the always liberal Fox News Poll).
Final Results, Bush 50.7%, Kerry 48.3%.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/U.....on_results
So, looks like the polls were pretty spot on.
And what is RCP’s average as of today for Bush?
39.6% approve, 57.4% disapprove.
http://www.realclearpolitics.com/polls.html
Boy, those facts are tricky business when we lie, aren’t they?
Please note two things. One, how incredibily wrong you are. Two, how I am able to use facts and give links to my data, where you are stuck just pulling stuff out of your ass.
Sucks to be you, doesn’t it.
What’s next for women after South Dakota, DOOFUS? Covering up head to toe in black? No wonder you support Bush! Bin Laden is still alive and making tapes. Bush is making your dreams come true DOOFUS.
If a fertility clinic was on fire and DOOFUS had a choice between saving a bunch of petri dishes with fertilized eggs or a two year old child – what would DOOFUS choose?
Oral contraceptives? Depo-Provera shots? Nope – those are abortifacents according to DOOFUS’ friends. HPV vaccinations that reduce the chances of cervical cancer – nahh! – that leads to sex without consequences.
DOOFUS – proud upstanding member of the AMERICAN TALIBAN!
Oink – you’re insane. Go relax with Jim West and drink some more wingnut kool-aid!
If Dixon really wants to run and collect some Republican campaign contributions in the process I can’t stop him but I’m not going to be silent about it. A VOTE FOR DIXON IS A VOTE FOR MCGAVICK! ’nuff said!
If Dixon has half a brain (which is doubtful) and wants to run for some other office on the Dem ticket – he has my blessing!
Oink – almost forgot. If Dixon is missing half of his brain and wants to run as a Republican – he has my full support there as well.
Your party, the party of inclusion and tolerance, would accept him with open arms – wouldn’t it?
If Dixon has half a brain (which is doubtful) and wants to run for some other office on the Dem ticket – he has my blessing!
Commentby For the Clueless— 3/11/06@ 12:29 pm
So, you now need “half a brain” to run as a Dem???
When did you raise the bar asswipe??!!
cluelessASS: Why are you against the first amendment? Why do you enjoy shutting down your political opponents?
I live in a blue state. I speak from experience in the state I live. Why do you project these blue state negativities in red states? I experience these deliberate actions here in FUWA!
Regarding the entry above regarding the prospective 13 year old conversation. It is sure funny how you are sooooooo conservative in your children and their upbringing while wildly librul in all other stuff. You see that’s schizophrenia. I am conservative in my parenting AND how I look at things. That’s consistency! You are inconsistent but we all know that about cluelessASS!
CluelessASS: Your party the party of abuse and would use Dixon and then discard him. What powerful authoritative government positions have librul administrations given black people? Even Jean Francois Kerry admitted white peeples would be in powerful positions in his projected administration! Again cluelessASS is living up to his potential!
Foghorn Freephorn @ 126
PFKPPPFF – your reading comprehension is getting pretty bad in your old age. Let me spell it out a little more clearly. Goldy will allow HA commenters to rate each other’s comments. He’ll give you the benefit of the doubt at the outset. If you write dirty-minded fantasies about the children of those you disdain politically, you’ll be troll-rated. If you use ad-hominem, strawmen and argue dishonestly, you’ll be troll rated. I’m planning to be on my best behavior – are you?
Blue state negatives in red states? How freaking ignorant are you, FF? Texas? Georgia? Go move there if you think it’s such a conservative utopia. Obviously you have an aversion to paying a state income tax – try Wyoming. See how well you’re accepted in Darth Cheney-land.
Freep – I’m not going to discuss my kids or my parenting style with you anymore.
Foghorn Freephorn @ 127
Bill Clinton’s administration “looked like America”. Did you forget? Plenty of black folks, asians, hispanics, etc, etc.
Dixon could be a great guy for all I know but his judgement sucks. Playing spoiler sucks. It reflects terribly on him. If he wanted a debate with Cantwell, he should have ran as a Democrat. He certainly wouldn’t have got it running as a Republican.
Go ahead Puddy, join your fellow Republicans and cut him a check.
CluelessASS: Clinton’s Admin looked like America? By golly, yes you are right. All the powerful positions held by white guys and gals. He gave lesser positions to blacks, and hispanics. And, 42% of his upper level positions was white and Jewish. Why didn’t he find any black Jewish people? He didn’t look hard enough. The important positions:
Secretary of State-White Guy/Gal
NSA Head-White Guy
Secretary of HUD-White Guy
Secretary of Education-White Guy
Attorney General-White Gal
etc.
Oh and another thing, Internet porn novels? Please lead me to them so I can see what you read when the wife and children go to bed. And you stop talking about your parenting skills. Yes, because you are schizoid! You lead two lives. You call me freep when my commentary hits home. So I must be hitting home runs because the cluelessASS name calling is at a fever pitch!!!
CluelessASS: Rate a comment software will be telling on your posts. You write mindless trash. Any decent rating will be given by your librul friends out of mercy. Tell me, what do you bring to the conversation besides name calling and repeat commentary? NUTHIN! You can’t create a thought without going to your favorite leftist moron web sites. Since I started my visitation site count, I visited FR once in almost 132 days. What is your total for TP, MM, MMoore, DK and others? 0 days! You won’t be truthful cause you are one big liar!
FF @ 132
Bzzzzt – wrong on HUD
Henry Cisneros was head of HUD – Hispanic
Ron Brown – Commerce – African-American
Mike Espy – Ag – African-American
Alexis Herman – Labor – African-American
Frederico Pena – Transportation – Hispanic
Jesse Brown – Veterans Affairs – African American
Togo D. West Jr. – Veterans Affairs – African American
Lani Guinier would have been head of the Civil Rights division if it wasn’t for your beloved screeching white-boys in the Republican party!
Plenty of African-Americans worked in Clinton’s WH. Hell, his secretary was black. Clinton had the best rapport with African-Americans of any President.
You’ve been shredded on this one freep.
I don’t have to read any porn freep – your sick fantasies alone are enough to turn anyone off to porn.
Freep – freep is as freep does. Mindless trash? You’re addicted to it – NewsWhacks, WingNutDaily, Moonie Times, a million wingnut bloggers, etc. You’re addicted to even mindful trash – like the WSJ editorial page – but it’s still dishonest trash. I don’t care how long you’ve been away from the looniest of them all – Free Republic – you’re a walking loony bin.
Freep I remember you came here belligerent out of the gate – democrapic, Moveon.pork, etc.. You went over to (un)SP to trash the best commenters here. After the election contest was over, who turned out on top? You reap what sow pal. Your time here is ending.
Like I said, I’m going to be on my best behavior. I’ll come here to argue honestly and when I troll-rate someone I’m going to have a reason. Are you up to that challenge? I don’t think so.
However, if you’re comfortable with your style and refuse to change – there’s PLENTY of places to extemporize – like (un)SP and FR.
I’ll make this expressly clear:
YOU HAVE MY COMPLETE, TOTAL, UNEQUIVOCAL SUPPORT TO EXERCISE YOUR FIRST AMMENDMENT RIGHTS OF FREE SPEECH –
on a wingnut website.
CluelessASS: I didn’t go to any of YOUR favorite sites for my info. I looked up his past administration. You are one dumb fuck if you thik I have to use those sites to prove my points.
Oh cluelessASS, kiss my ASS!
Rabbit,
You are truly a fucking idiot. You so fucking politically correct with this dipshit woman getting herself knocked-up that you can’t see that she is the one responsible for her life. She has fucked herself royally and deserves it.
Freep: Where did you go? NewsWhacks.com? Yes, indeed I stay AWAY from sites like that.
And your LIPS will FLY away from my ASS AS YOU ARE BANNED from HA.org!!! Then we’ll have some decent conversation here instead of your wingnut drivel.