I have the opportunity to score a “FRIST!”, but I feel like I should click the link to qualify, but I’m scared…

Quite a quandry.

OK, clicked the link, was scarily reasonable until the close, then got to the space alien part.

So okay, what if we’re like, “It is outlandish to say that torture is against the law”?

Ah, the “NUH-HUH WE DIDN’T DO NUTHIN’ WRONG” school of legal thought.

Oh. My. Godz.

He’s writing the Torture Memo for the Torture Memos.

Since we have Memos that say we didn’t break the law, then we didn’t break the law, because the memos said we didn’t, therefore investigations would be investigating the fact that there was no lawbreaking, which is absurd so why have investigations at all?

Shorter: Nothing to see here, move along…

Next up: new Memo to explain why the Memo about the Memos proves that releasing the Memos is itself a violation of the law, and should be investigated.

I’m a lawyer. Anyone want me to write a memo saying that something previously thought to be illegal is really legal? Because, I mean, the fact of me writing the memo renders it legal, right? No one needs to investigate the memo itself.

Next up: new Memo to explain why the Memo about the Memos proves that releasing the Memos is itself a violation of the law, and should be investigated.

It’s either like one of those “infinte mirrors” things or a collapse into a singularity.

Totally evil either way, though.

[stands up] Your honor and members of the jury,

It is simply simply outlandish and absurd to think that my client robbed that liquor store.

I rest my case. [sits down]

Come to think of it, it’s also like that old Steve Martin routine – rob a bank and then argue “I forgot it was against the law to rob banks”.

Just issue a memo that bank-robbing in this case was done to protect the larger interest of society in general and hey presto you’re free and clear.

It’s either like one of those “infinte mirrors” things or a collapse into a singularity.

Totally evil either way, though.

I was thinking more like infinitely swirling down the drain of the shitmoat, but yeah.

Thanks; I have this to point to the next time someone refers to Ponnuru as a reasonable conservative.

The people who strongly oppose investigation and prosecution would be on stronger ground, it seems to me, making the argument that it is simply outlandish and absurd to think that policymakers violated the law. Can that argument be made?

No.

This has been another edition of…

You know, I am beginning to wonder when all these conservative pundits are going to start arguing that sending envelopes full of anthrax powder through the mail to media personalities and Democratic senators is not only a good thing, but a patriotic imperative, and anyone who believes otherwise is a terrorist sympathizer and doesn’t love their mothers, baseball and apple pie.

Ramesh Peepeepoopoo:

Can that argument be made?

Fuck no, you disgusting piece of converted Catholic garbage.

Still defending the Inquisition, where your kind first attempted to torture suspected Mohammadans?

I have this to point to the next time someone refers to Ponnuru as a reasonable conservative

Cripes, he writes for NRO – what more proof do you need he’s gone beyond the pale?

(Admittedly that’s a fucking awfully short trip these dark days, mind you.)

Fast-thinking, fast-typing show-offs!! I hate you too!!!!

Not as much as I hate Ponnuru, but still …

Anyone want me to write a memo saying that something previously thought to be illegal is really legal?

I had a priest do something similar back when I was an altar boy.

This one of those little articles that would benefit from a smiling picture of Ponnurururu. Let’s all get a good look at the banality of evil.

Can that argument be made?

With a straight face?

I mean, of course the argument can be made, but it’s defending said epically moronic argument that’s going to be the motherfucker.

Nice picture in his Wikipoodia entry. His mouf is very pretty.

Can that argument be made?

Sure. Why not. And Jeffrey Dahmer just had the munchies real bad and was out of Cheetohs.

For once I think the ‘shorter’ has mis-stepped. The whole article asks a stupid question, but we can’t accuse him of a stupid answer – it isn’t there.

If I were Rammish Wormtongue, I would file this one away for when the tar and pitchfork crews show up, to demonstrate I was a pro-investigation mole all along.

Not only can that argument be made, David Rivkin, Lee Casey and Liz Cheney have made it. They heard Team Evil paid better.

But let’s watch Ponnuru brainstorm in public, shall we, since it sure seems that his main goal is not to pursue justice, but prevent it.

Is this what he teaches his kids: As long as you say it’s ok before you do it, you can get away with anything.

Ponnuru (my emphasis):

The people who strongly oppose investigation and prosecution would be on stronger ground, it seems to me, making the argument that it is simply outlandish and absurd to think that policymakers violated the law.

Is he using the term policymakers to make a distinction here between executive branch officials—elected or appointed—who enacted policy and the people who gave them legal advice on policy? Or am I being too generous?

I guess that Ponnuru’s argument means he’s not in favor limits on government power, i.e. limited government. Won’t that get him in trouble with the libertarians, or do government limits only apply to others?

Thirded on the picture. Need a mug of him with the sweater vest turned up to eleven.

Is this what he teaches his kids: As long as you say it’s ok before you do it, you can get away with anything.

“Just the place for a Snark! I have said it twice:
That alone should encourage the crew.
Just the place for a Snark! I have said it thrice:
What I tell you three times is true.”

– opinion submitted by Boots, Barrister and Broker, Attorneys-at-Law

This is the Goldberg plausibly-deniable form of argument. Rather than attempt to defend torture with unconvincing sophistry, ask rhetorical questions: “But what if one were to defend torture with unconvincing sophistry?”

Is he using the term policymakers to make a distinction here between executive branch officials—elected or appointed—who enacted policy and the people who gave them legal advice on policy? Or am I being too generous?

That’s possible. But, would that mean he would be okay with investigating/prosecuting the lawyers?

To me, it seems like a version of “don’t criminalize policy disputes.” In other words, since all they were doing was “making policy,” they can never have violated the law. Which just goes back to the original stupid argument: “so long as we call it anything other than violating the law, it doesn’t violate the law.” So, yeah, who knows?

The people who strongly oppose investigation and prosecution would be on stronger ground, it seems to me, making the argument that it is simply outlandish and absurd to think that policymakers violated the law. Can that argument be made?

What is the antecedent of the final sentence’s that? That is, is that argument the one that claims outlandishness or does it refer to the meta argument that relying on the other argument – the one that was the topic of his first paragraph – is not as strong an argument as the ultimately proposed argument?

In other words, is Runnish Poopooruru asking whether his first argument is better than his second argument? Did he throw that second argument in there as a ringer to get his other argument all confused? Or was it his confusion as to whether his whichever one of those arguments it was that he was arguing with against his argument that…

Man. It’s really hard to argue with that guy. Impossible, really.

PENIS

QED

When’s his latest compilation, The Party of Torture, coming out?

Ah.

The antecedent of “that” in the last sentence is “the argument that it is simply outlandish and absurd to think that policymakers violated the law”.

Basically as I read it he’s saying to his fellow Satanists that they should be arguing not the effectiveness of torture of lack thereof, but the idea that to criticize the policymakers, i.e. Bush Yoo Cheney Rice u.s.w. after the fact is invalid since the Leader’s will is law and if The Leader says to torture there’s no way it’s illegal.

So, basically, pretty much what we kacked a bunch of guys at Nuremburg for arguing sixty-five years or so back.

Thanks, Pere Ubu.

I disagree with your conclusion however. While your Nuremberg analogy is a good one, and quite supportable, to me Runny Poopoo’s position (stipulating your antecednt analysis) is more akin to the Nixonian “If the President does it it’s not illegal.”

POOP, also. And such as.

All these “revelations” of the last few says about torture having “prevented a West Coast 9/11”?

If the Bush Administration had actually done this, it would have been announced loudly and clearly — preferably from the deck of an aircraft carrier — and been carried by FOX for about two years.

The antecedent of “that” in the last sentence is “the argument that it is simply outlandish and absurd to think that policymakers violated the law”.

=========================================================

It’s not like they’re Democrats and something White House cat something something travel office something.

Hey! Where are Gavin’s David Foster Wallace®-ish paragraph-to-page-long footnotes?

Andrew McCarthy, responding to Ponnuru, says in the end it doesn’t matter if government officials broke the law with regard to torture because this issue is trumped by other, more weighty concerns.

more akin to the Nixonian “If the President does it it’s not illegal.”

That’s pretty much where I was going with that.

700, really, I swear. Maybe I need more coffee? Naw, too late in the evening. Bah.

Silly Joe Max! Shitmoats don’t have drains.

Hey! Where are Gavin’s David Foster Wallace®-ish paragraph-to-page-long footnotes?

I’d make a Network reference with “Perhaps he’s just run out of them, you see?” But it doesn’t seem to work very well, so I won’t.

Ramesh Ponnuru, the noted Indian American soprano? I have all her albums!

Can that argument be made?

Only in a high, piping voice strongly indicative of undescended testicles.

more akin to the Nixonian “If the President does it it’s not illegal.”

That’s my read. The law is whatever the policymakers say it is. A bit stronger than the Nixonian formulation, but pretty much the same thing: the executive branch cannot break the law, by definition.

Basically as I read it he’s saying to his fellow Satanists that they should be arguing not the effectiveness of torture of lack thereof…

We resent being compared to Ramesh Ponnuru.

For one thing, we dress better.

I think our President should make use of this finding to skip the whole “make the Congress pass a law” for Republican Reeducation Camps and just sign an Executive Order saying round the cocksuckers up.

The people who strongly oppose investigation and prosecution would be on stronger ground, it seems to me, making the argument that it is simply outlandish and absurd to think that policymakers violated the law. Can that argument be made?

“After all, what do “violated” and “law” really mean? The dictionary defines…”

I bet Alan Keyes could be a huge help in puzzling out this enigmery.

Shorter Andy McCarthy:

“We lawyers violate the law all the time and get away with it. So what?”

Yeah. Stalinists, maybe, but not Satanists.

Can that argument be made?

That’s an incredibly stupid line in and of itself. One can argue anything one damn well pleases – angels on pins, whiskers on kittens, singing talent on Britney, whatever.

But then, if Uncle Tom Ramesh asked “Would such an argument have merit?”, the answer would obviously be “Hell no you fucking moron”, so I guess he had to go with the rhetorical retardation just to write the damn column in the first place.

Satinists, perhaps?

Hey libs!

Obambi is about to force Chrysler into bankruptcy. What do you think that will do to Michigan in 2012?

The following has no relation whatever to the topic but I just saw it and have to share it with people who will appreciate it. One of the staffers over at TPM (not sure who to credit specifically) referred to that batshit insane Congrefwoman from MN as Michelle Bachmann (R-DSM-IV).

I have to wipe the coffee off my keyboard now.

Chrysler forced themselves into bankruptcy. Obama is saving them from extinction. We’re pretty cool with that.

The law is whatever the policymakers say it is.
If only you people had a second and a third wing of government, respectively tasked with enacting laws and with interpreting how they apply to specific cases.

I bet “The Midwest”is from New York or California.

Bankruptcy for Chrysler will mean liquidation. Which will mean extinction for Chrysler.

The same could very well happen to GM.

Does the Democrat Party want to be the Party that saw the American auto industry die? Wow, I know THAT will pain the whole Midwest dark red.

Obambi is about to force Chrysler into bankruptcy.

No, it’s Chrylser that’s forcing Chrysler into bankruptcy. I thought you were the Party of Personal Responsibility,

And I also thought bankruptcy was a “Get Out Of Jail Free” card – anyway, that’s why you assclowns had to change the laws for mere uhmans a few years back. I assume it still is for the corporations who walk among us like gods.

Does the Democrat Party

It’s “DemocratICParty”, you festering smega-stain.

But then again you’re just parroting Limbaugh, which nonentities like you do in lieu of forming your own goddamn polticial thoughts.

“It’s “DemocratICParty”, you festering smega-stain.”

Plenty of people said “Democrat Party”, including liberal hero Lyndon Johnson.

Plenty of people said “Democrat Party”, including liberal hero Lyndon Johnson.

Okay, I call “bullshit”, sunshine.

Democrat as an adjective was still sometimes used by some twentieth-century Republicans as a campaign tool but was used with particular virulence by the late senator Joseph R. McCarthy of Wisconsin, a Republican who sought by repeatedly calling it the Democrat party to deny it any possible benefit of the suggestion that it might also be democratic.

Chrysler may be forced into “bankruptcy protection”, which is a tad different than common, everyday, goin’ broke. The company will survive in some form or another. No real need to wet the sheets just yet.

…including liberal hero Lyndon Johnson.

Um, I was actually alive when LBJ was president, youngster. He was no “liberal hero”, if you consider that thousands and thousands of liberals, including myself, marched against the war in Vietnam that he escalated. Liberals forced LBJ to drop his bid for re-election, which is an unusual thing to do with a “hero”, don’t you think?

No, you don’t think. That would require thinking.

Everything with this troll is “some LIBERAL said THIS, and LIBERALS don’t like THAT, so how’z them apples Hunh? Hunh? Suck it, libtards. Snuh snuh snuh…”

And they wonder why they can’t get elected. Like in the heavily GOP district of NY-20, for example.

Snuh snuh snuh…

Is this the same Chrysler that just turned down further bacon-saving government loan funds because the chumps who killed the business didn’t want to accept pay caps at the same time Fiat is demanding the union agree to major cuts? Shame on Obama!

Ramesh Ponnuru is outlandish and absurd. No further comment on him is necessary.

Having said that, Andy McCarthy says that the legal case that there was torture is “preposterous”.

WTF. I think you can argue that there was no torture because the statutes that apply use a very restricted definition (which is what the memo argues), but the idea that hanging a man from the ceiling for a week is torture isn’t as unhinged as the idea that you couldn’t expect the person hanging him there to think there might be something wrong with doing ti.

So okay, what if we’re like, “It is outlandish to say that torture is against the law”?

Well, Justice Scalia did say that torture was just fine as long as you weren’t using it for punishment. So as long as your victims haven’t been convicted of any crime, you should be in the clear, right?

Torture is CLEARLY not fine as long as it isn’t being used for punishment. For example, this troll isn’t trying to punish ME with his inanities and yet here I am, being tortured by all the stupid. SO WRONG!

I mostly just wanted to use this name.

was scarily reasonable until the close, then got to the space alien part.
Are we discussing actor212’s geneology again?

[quote]Um, I was actually alive when LBJ was president, youngster.[/quote]

I’m on Social Security*, Lib, so chances are I’m older than you. I remember LBJ and his big spending, failed “war on poverty” and the riots in our major cities under his disaster of a tenure. But Libs today just love him.

Anyway, no, Chicagoland (northern Illinois) isn’t really the Midwest. It’s the “Third Coast”.

*I disagree with Social Security, but I’m just trying to get the money back from the forced “payroll tax” I was put under government fiat to pay. If I had had the choice back then, I would have opted out. But Libs don’t believe in choice, except when it comes to killing fetuses.

was scarily reasonable until the close, then got to the space alien part.
Are we discussing actor212’s geneology again?

Soon to be featured in a recipe bayou.

I DONT CARE IF LIBRULS SAY U DONT LOVE LBJ I KNO YOU DO.
ALSO, MONIES FROM TEH GUMMINT IS ONLY OK FOR ME.
ALSO ALSO, SINCE I HATES ALL FURINNERS, LOGIKLY ALL PEEPLES I HATE ARE FURINNERS IN SOME WAY.

We’ve crashed in the Andes with nothing to eat but Dittoheads and Paultards! Whatever shall we do?!

POOPOONEW! I CHOOSE YOU!

Oh, to be a ‘Groom of the Stool’ and member of the ‘Gentlemen of the Privy Chamber’. Those were the days!

*I disagree with Social Security, but I’m just trying to get the money back from the forced “payroll tax” I was put under government fiat to pay. If I had had the choice back then, I would have opted out.

Oh, how noble. “I WILL NOT TAKE YOUR TAINTED MONEY! … oh, could you get me that in tens and twenties, please?”

Tainted money?
I told you it was a mistake for the Government Mint to outsource the printing of banknotes to China.

Are any of the Kiwis who frequent this font of wisdom going to be in Christchurch this weekend?

Me and the Missus are going to be in town and could use a tour guide…

I can hear the troll, singing in a gravelly voice

I wanna fling poop at you
‘coz you, you are a liberal, you
poopoopydoo

Boring troll is boring.

I am pitching wooooo at yooooou
But something obscures my vieeeeeew of yoooooou
It’s Ramesh Ponnuru

in Christchurch this weekend?
Smut Barfly Tours are only available in Wellington, alas. When I’m in Chchch I usually end up at the Twisted Hop or the Dux de Lux or Pomeroys, but real-ale pubs are not necessarily your scene.

“*I disagree with Social Security, but I’m just trying to get the money back from the forced “payroll tax” I was put under government fiat to pay. If I had had the choice back then, I would have opted out. But Libs don’t believe in choice, except when it comes to killing fetuses.”
So you must really hate Ronald Regan who doubled the self-employment tax on us John Galt type small businessmen twetny some years ago. And where do you live troll boy, since you know so much about how Chicago? I’ve lived in Virginia and West Virginia all my life, which I guess you’d describe as third coast too.

And by the way, I call bullshit on you being on social security. You’re way too dumb to be over 62.

You’re way too dumb to be over 62.

While I agree trolly pants is probably a kiddie, there’s nothing saying old people can’t be stupid. I know some real benighted ones my own self.

“but real-ale pubs are not necessarily your scene.”

Definitely my scene. Thanks for the heads-up.

I should have put it on the Intertoobs, just for future referrals, but Hannity is backing out of his pledge to Charles Grodin to get waterboarded.

I figure he has a note from his mother.

What I mean is, I shoulda made my prediction public, heck.

BTW, the GOP custom-gerrymandered NY-20 went to an even more liberal democrat than the previous holder of that seat. Bookmark it.

Bookmark it.

Oh, I did. I did.

But I know there was some other blathering predicting a huge blowout for Tedisco that I haven’t chased down. Might even be in that same thread.

Al Franken will never take his Senate seat, unless its about 3-4 years into his “term”.

Bookmark THAT , fucktards.

I bet it must really piss you off that Al Frank will spend half his “term” in Court.

Ditto for Murphy. Even if he wins, it will be about 1.2 through his single “term”/ LOL.

And we hope it makes YOU happy that the Republik Party can only gain any ground by being whiny little obstructionist bitches like Norm Coleman. I’ll send a tiny violin and some tearfree shampoo to the Real Midwest, whatever its perameters may be.

The Real Midwest is every part of the Midwest outside of Chicagoland. I.e., the parts of the midwest Obama won by running as a MODERATE! Not the big spending, high taxing, pro-abort, appeaser he is now. In 2012 Indiana, Ohio, Michigan, Iowa, Wisconsin, will be RED! SOLID. RED!

And we hope it makes YOU happy that the Republik Party can only gain any ground by being whiny little obstructionist bitches like Norm Coleman.

And their fucking with the Minnesota Senate seat shows how much the Redoublechins care about the Midwest.

Obama will be the President that saw the end of GM and Chrysler. That will ensure Republican dominance of the Midwest outside “Third Coast” Chicagoland for a generation.

Stupid boring parody troll sez:

I’m so mad at you funny liberals who do not recognize my obvious genius, I’m going to spend the rest of my life at Sadly, No! typing stupid right wing b.s.

Cuz I’m mad, yo! How come no one recognizes my genius???!!!one1?

RED! SOLID. RED!

Hey, ifthethunderdontgetya™³²®©–

I clicked on your link in your name, and guess what?

2001 called. It wants its web design back.

FIXED.

now fuck off.

Seriously, moron. Have you updated your website since, oh, 2002? And I’m being REAL generous there.

I guess that’s one way to win an argument: the argumentum ad webmasterium incapabilius.

Hey! Where’d everybody go? Come back! Pay attention to me and all my stupid worn-out lame-ass wittycisms! What, like I have a big “L” tattooed on my forehead? So what if it’s backward! Let’s see YOU do your own tattoo in the mirror! With ballpoint pen!!!1!!!! Hey pen almost spells penis.

A stereotypically gay New York fashion correspondent called. He wants his putdown format back.

*sniff*

I’m being called out by an asshole whose major complaint is no one would give him a “you won the internets!” when he would post at S,N!.

So he’s spent the rest of his days being a relentlessly boring parody troll with no life what so ever.

You want to complain about my geocities homepage? Go get the pigeons off your park bench, you boring douche bag.
~

I guess that’s one way to win an argument: the argumentum ad webmasterium incapabilius.

Ordinarily, goalpoasts move in a more-or-less predictable direction. This is pretty arbitrary, so some points to trollypants for that.

Minus several million points for boring and stupid and unable to handle Tedisco’s LOSING THE ELECTION which he LOST.

Igor called. He wants his Abnormal Brain back.

“X called, it wants its Y back” called. It wants itself back.

“You want to complain about my geocities homepage? ”

Yeah, I do jerkass. What kind of a person who is even semi-computer literate has a fucking GEOCITIES page in 2009? Come on now! Especially one that hasn’t been updated since 2002. Why don’t you just have a page that links to ASCII code instead? At least that would be retro instead of just plain fucking retarded.

hahahaha jesus

Oh what, liberal dipshit! I got an idea to get your page up to date! Add some spinning jpegs! Yeah, that’s the ticket!

*wahhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhh*

I haz a complaint!111one!

What’s all this aboot a page that hasn’t been updated since 2002?

That page didn’t even exist in 2002.

*obi-wan wave*

Add some spinning jpegs! Yeah, that’s the ticket!

They didn’t have animated jpegs in 2002. They don’t have them now!

I remember having chicken pox and itching so bad I wished I could crawl out of my skin. I imagine being a troll feels like that only inside your brain.

“That page didn’t even exist in 2002. ”

So you ARE just plain fucking retarded then. Thanks for the heads up.

Because if you created a page that looked like that after 2002, you should be banned from the internet forever, fuckstick.

Because if you created a page that looked like that after 2002, you should be banned from the internet forever, fuckstick.

I have a new idea! Just for our jealous, relentless, parody trool who has nothing else to do.

Maybe he should play in the park more, and not make S,N! threads suck because he’s a boring, jealous, unfunny dude with nothing to say.

Answer is hidden in the italix!

My own self called. I want my flaming stupid retarded ass back. Ha ha!!1!!

The fact is, your use of naughty words means you are not a Real American.

Wheeeeee, look at me, a buffoon, criticising someone’s web site hoping that will give me, a brain dead moron, credibility. Am I sucking hard or what?

HEy ifthethunderdontgetya™³²®©, a an amphetamine-addled monkey with aspergers could make a better web page than the one that is linked to in your name.

Excuse me, Mr. BODCAMW? We’re closing now. Please put your shoes and socks back on and sign off the computer.

My experience is that people who openly and forcefully hate on the AOL/GeoCities sort of thing are people who are really a couple of steps removed from that position on the hierarchy themselves.

I’m imagining you as a help-desk tech who took a couple of tries to pass the A+. Or maybe you’re on your last try before the boss-man gives you the royal boot. Either that, or a Randroid libertarian getting work study at your community college. Geek Squad. And so on.

The tech world’s equivalent of, “would you like some Wi-Fi with that?” You just KNOW you’re BETTER than these…people, yet somehow you never seem to rise above. Funny that.

I really like this site. It’s always smart and dead-on funny. I’m always baffled, though, by the way you all always respond to the cretin-trolls who frequent the place. I just don’t get why you respond to them. It’s bad enough that they are morons eating their own shit and daubing it on the walls. Why do you encourage them? Just asking. I meant it about really liking this site.

Well, sjelly, I’m the “”boring” “parody troll” people just can’t help responding to!

amphetamine-addled monkey with aspergers

Familiar with that, are you?

an amphetamine-addled monkey with aspergers could make a better web page.

Prove it. Show us your web page.

amphetamine-addled monkey with aspergers

What a coincidence – I just made some of that for dinner.

You misspelled “asparagus”.

Why do you encourage them?

We shouldn’t, but there are 2 reasons. 1) they can’t be discouraged 2) teh Sadlies won’t ban them.

Why do you encourage them?

This is a fine question.

I believe our proprietors hold themselves to a far higher threshold than the gibbering monkey sites they parody, when it comes to suppressing dissent.

But this does allow a certain obsessive-compulsive person with no life whatsoever to pollute the site, simply because when it posted as a normal person, it was not given the praise it felt it was due.

So we get the relentless monkey poop-flinger, angrily flinging its poops.

I’d say it deserves to be outted, and sent on its way. But that’s up to Gavin and company.

Jackasses. I was never a “regular” moron. I’m a conservative who is here to sabotage this site. So suck my cock, hard.

He’s quiet now, probably because he broke his keyboard.

OH NOES! TEH PARODY TROLL!!!!!!11111!!!

No, idiot. I hate liberals. Fucking hate them. I never even posted under a consistent name here and, no, I’m not “troofus”/

The site threatens you so much you want to sabotage it, heh. How pathetic are you.

NB: trolling isn’t sabotage but carry on babbling

Jackasses. I was never a “regular” moron. I’m a conservative…

Our apologies for calling you a regular moron. You’re obviously a very special moron.

BODCAMW, what do you hope to accomplish?

I understand George W. Bush did great things in Texas National Guard.

And Dick Cheney’s other priorities ultimately proved out when he authorized the torture of random people.

But what medal will you win for anonymously being a boring dickhead at Sadly, No!?

The John Boehner Bronzed Tan Medal?

The Norm Coleman “I’ll suck right-wing cocks as long as they pay me” award for being a whore?

How about the ” U.S. Sen. James M. Inhofe(R-Okla) Jesus rode a Dinosaur, a nice Christian Dinosaur” award?

Okay, normally I wouldn’t say this, but would it be possible to not associate idiotic trolls with Asperger’s syndrome? I have Asperger’s myself, and I can endure “retard” or “weirdo”, but not “right-winger”. Sorry to be a baby.

“Random people” you say?

Are KSM and Abu Zabidah “random people”?

fuck you. They were masterminds of 9/11.

I remember having chicken pox and itching so bad I wished I could crawl out of my skin. I imagine being a troll feels like that only inside your brain.

Shecky, I do believe that such a condition is known as Swelling Itching Brain.

I were the masterbater of 9/11.

Please don’t let him become the master baiter.

That road only leads to hell.

Aiming for the killfile… from way downtown…bang!

Wow.

The Douche is strong in this one.

Please don’t let him become the master baiter.

Master baiter themed porn features slow motion chum shots.

Hi again. Thanks for the responses. Don’t misunderstand me, I don’t mean you ought to ban the feces-flingers; I just don’t get why you respond. Surely, that’s what they want. Why satisfy them?

No, idiot. I hate liberals. Never met one, fucking hate them.

FIFYour stupid ass.

Definitely my scene. Thanks for the heads-up.
All 3 pubs are central. Pomeroys is on the Kilmore St / Fitzgerald Ave corner, and many years ago it was where Doktorling Sonja took her first steps.
The Twisted Hop is in a complex of courtyards between Lichfield St. and High Street (surrounded by converted warehouses), which also contains a Bavarian-styled brauhaus and a Russian-themed vodka bar, so make sure your liver is in good condition. There is Chchch’s best coffee-bar just around the corner (C1), and a string of second-hand bookshops on that block of Manchester Street — it’s a classy neighbourhood.
Also check out any outlets for Harringtons beers.

The Chchch art museum / gallery is good.

My amphetamine-addled monkey butler is trying to complain about something, but he’s twitching so badly that I can’t understand his sign language.

it’s a classy neighbourhood.

Classy? It sounds like Heaven itself.

I should have mentioned Alice’s Video Store on the corner, but comsympinko might not be in town long enough to use their services.

The troll is 62 now, and on social security? A couple of days he was lecturing us from a podium of wealth and status. Another victim of the Obama recession.
Artist’s impression of the troll and the ever-changing biographical claims he feels obliged to provide.

Smut Clyde–

Thanks for the tips. Agreeing with Xecky, it sounds like my kind of place. Probably won’t need the video store, but you never know.

Oh dear, shades of Special Ed – seriously, a troll responding to pwnage of its aborted derail by slagging the pwner’s website design?

Saddest … response … ever.

Yet oddly, it made my face LOL!

Is that you, Mr. Cigarskunk???//?

In Cigarskunk-related activities, RB links to the Wiki fursuit page, where we can read that Costumes can include makeup and reflect the wearer’s personality.

This is why I attend furry conventions dressed as roadkill.

Also, would it be too obvious to make jokes about ‘Life, liberty, and the fur-suit of happiness’?

buy cialis online buy cialis online in malaysia – cialis half price

buy valium valium generic form – valium diazepam usp