That’s a bad Sadly, No! Very bad!
Posted on January 28th, 2004 by
Amber responds to our refusal to provide her with a picture of the Sadly, No! staff:
No picture? :_-(
(8) Don’t cry for us Amber Pawlik (8)
In other news, we failed to congratulate someone earlier this week for being the 100,000th visitor to S,N! So belated congratulations to, well, someone. Informed of the milestone, a friend of S,N! replied by email:
How many of those are Amber Pawlik?
Jerks of a feather flame together we guess.
I am trying to think of a joke about jerking one’s feather.
Hey, congrats on the 100,000 visiters! It clearly means that Sadly,No!is a force to be reckoned with, and that no one again will dare doubt your power. And it shows why Amber is making a play for you. But just say no! She has held hands with too many men, and you know what THAT means. Yup, lesbian hands.
Yup, lesbian hands.
That reminds me of the old joke:
Q. What do you call a lesbian with long fingers?
A. Well-hung.
Why didn’t you refer Amber to the pictures of you posted here? I’m sure Amber would enjoy them a lot. Gail probably would too, and perhaps s.z. You are Arnold Schwarzenegger, right?
Whoa, Frederick! What if Kathryn Lopez had seen that photo you directed us to, featuring um, male naughty bits? A long hospitalization would have been in order, at a minimum.
What if Kathryn Lopez had seen that photo you directed us to, featuring um, male naughty bits? A long hospitalization would have been in order, at a minimum.
Putting K-Lo out of commission for a while is certainly desirable. Do you suppose Ann “Thrax,” Peggy Nooners, and Kathleen Parker would have equally violent reactions?