Intermarkets' Privacy Policy
Support


Donate to Ace of Spades HQ!


Contact
Ace:
aceofspadeshq at gee mail.com
Buck:
buck.throckmorton at protonmail.com
CBD:
cbd at cutjibnewsletter.com
joe mannix:
mannix2024 at proton.me
MisHum:
petmorons at gee mail.com
J.J. Sefton:
sefton at cutjibnewsletter.com


Recent Entries
Absent Friends
Jon Ekdahl 2026
Jay Guevara 2025
Jim Sunk New Dawn 2025
Jewells45 2025
Bandersnatch 2024
GnuBreed 2024
Captain Hate 2023
moon_over_vermont 2023
westminsterdogshow 2023
Ann Wilson(Empire1) 2022
Dave In Texas 2022
Jesse in D.C. 2022
OregonMuse 2022
redc1c4 2021
Tami 2021
Chavez the Hugo 2020
Ibguy 2020
Rickl 2019
Joffen 2014
AoSHQ Writers Group
A site for members of the Horde to post their stories seeking beta readers, editing help, brainstorming, and story ideas. Also to share links to potential publishing outlets, writing help sites, and videos posting tips to get published. Contact OrangeEnt for info:
maildrop62 at proton dot me
Cutting The Cord And Email Security
Moron Meet-Ups





















« Two "Mohammed Attas? | Main | There's Hope For You Mutants Yet: Geeks, Freaks, & Gaywads The Hot Hunks In Japan »
August 19, 2005

Cindy Sheehan Wins A Convert!

For the GOP. A longtime liberal suddenly discovers Cindy Sheehan's shenanigans have pushed him to the right.

Thanks to Rick.


posted by Ace at 01:07 PM
Comments



Oh man, I can tell that the comments are going to be pure gold. Putting on a fresh pot of coffee now.

I love partisan bickering. :)

Posted by: Megan on August 19, 2005 01:14 PM

The good little democrat in me tied the little noose around his neck and jumped off the stool. He just couldn’t take it anymore.

Oh man, that is a priceless line. I am glad he sees the light. Being a strong Right Winger, I have been having doubts myself about the war, but he is right, we are there, we HAVE to see it through.

I hate seeing our men and women blown to bits, but the war they are fighting is helping the war on terror. I know that some will say we have hurt our cause because more terrorists are being recruited. Yes, to be sure that is happening, BUT more terrorists are being killed now then if we had never invaded.

I keep holding my breath for the Iraqi people to get so fed up and begin kicking terrorist ass.

Posted by: WunderKraut on August 19, 2005 01:19 PM

Bit late, isn't he? Even if Sheehan manages to reclaim her ditch, it seems unlikely she'll be able to reclaim the media momentum.

Nothing like pissing off your own side just when it probably won't do you any good with the other side, either.

Posted by: S. Weasel on August 19, 2005 01:25 PM

Easy on the coffee, Megan.

You know what happened last time.

Posted by: Rocketeer on August 19, 2005 01:59 PM

I know that some will say we have hurt our cause because more terrorists are being recruited.

Remember, you can't recruit the unwilling. If a person is wired to become a terrorist, it's gonna happen. Iraq may have been the proximate cause for many of these goons, but to me, that argues that we're just flushing 'em out now and killing them in one spot, rather than having to do it later all over the place.

Posted by: Rocketeer on August 19, 2005 02:02 PM

"Easy on the coffee, Megan. You know what happened last time."

:0

Keep Laura out of the thread!

Posted by: Megan on August 19, 2005 02:05 PM

Tease.

Posted by: Rocketeer on August 19, 2005 02:07 PM

...wait, we're not talking about the time she made me spray my monitor?

Posted by: Megan on August 19, 2005 02:12 PM

One of the commenters over there posted this link documenting Iraq's sponsorship of terrorism. It's a must-read.

Posted by: The Warden on August 19, 2005 02:13 PM

WunderKraut wrote:
I keep holding my breath for the Iraqi people to get so fed up and begin kicking terrorist ass.

You can come up for air now.

Posted by: on August 19, 2005 02:25 PM

Cool Beans about the Iraqis fighting back.

I think that Rocketeer may have misunderstood my comment about the war causing terrorist recruiting to go up. You have to read the next sentence where I say that is not so bad because we get to kill more of them. I think that is one of the bigger reasons for fighting. It takes the fight over there and keeps it away from our civilians. Besides our boys have cool weapons!

Posted by: WunderKraut on August 19, 2005 02:35 PM

the poll question "do you approve of the way President Bush is conducting the war"? misses a whole lot of people who support the war but don't think Bush is doing enough.

Posted by: Dave in Texas on August 19, 2005 02:37 PM

Eesh, just got done with that thread. Do the moonbats ever have anything other than "ENLIST ENLIST ENLIST?" Someone should post this link on Scott's site... maybe he could make it part of the banner or something, I don't know.

Posted by: Megan on August 19, 2005 02:38 PM

WunderKraut,

I am not trying to be obnoxious here, but I have a question: Were all these people who are being "pushed" into becoming terrorists by our presence in Iraq just sitting around arranging flowers before? I just don't buy it.

I can't see someone saying, "well I was going to attend college and find a nice girl to settle down with and have a family, but since Bush invaded Iraq, I'm going to go blow myself to pieces and take some infidels with me."

It streches the bounds of credibility a little, don't you think?

Posted by: Log Cabin on August 19, 2005 02:46 PM

No, WunderKraut, I think you misunderstand our intentions in fighting this war.

If we (the U.S.) didn't have to kill one person to effectively eliminate the threat of Islamofascism, we would have never gone to war.

Look at what we tolerate here in our own borders. The Ku Klux Klan, neo-Nazis, and most any other type of hate group you can think of. Even though some people would think it would be fun to kill every single one of these hatemongers, we don't do it.

Why? Because it's wrong to kill people just for thinking a certain way, even if that way is hateful. Only their actions count. The hateful groups mentioned above aren't currently a credible threat to us, because we keep them under surveillance and punish them severely if they ever do pose a threat.

If the Muslim terrorist groups were big-talking but ineffective hate groups, we could and would co-exist with them. But they're not. And so we won't.

Posted by: Sue Dohnim on August 19, 2005 02:55 PM

Log,

Running an Islamic florist is SERIOUS BUSINESS...

Posted by: on August 19, 2005 02:56 PM

Oddly enough I sort of agree with WK.

LCR asked: "Were all these people who are being "pushed" into becoming terrorists by our presence in Iraq just sitting around arranging flowers before?"

Nah - probably going to "Death to the Great Satan" rallies and burning the US flag. But possibly a fair-sized segment of them wasn't terribly motivated to do much beyond set flame to cloth and shout "derka derka mohammed jihad."

"I can't see someone saying, "well I was going to attend college"

"- to memorize the Koran and learn how to call for infidel killing more loudly than the other guys -"

"and find a nice girl to settle down with"

"- to beat, whip, rape, and possibly mutilate and/or murder if she were raped by anyone else, or if she spoke to or looked at anyone else for that matter -"

"and have a family"

"- though most baby girls would, of course, be buried alive because the family would be dishonored and the mother would be whipped again, regardless of whether or not she already had been that day -"

"but since Bush invaded Iraq, I'm going to go blow myself to pieces and take some infidels with me."

"- or at least give it my best shot, which means there's a high probability of a United States Marine shooting me in the head before I can do any damage at all, because I'm a dumb Islamoretard shithead."

Hey, this works out all right. :)

Posted by: Megan on August 19, 2005 02:58 PM

I'm sorry if I was harsh, WunderKraut. Sometimes we get sneaky trolls in here who make "straw men" out of conservative positions by exaggerating them.

Posted by: Sue Dohnim on August 19, 2005 03:06 PM

...y'know Sue, on the basis of that, you'd think Ace would've banned me long ago.

[pre-emptively firing a leftover nuke at the peanut gallery]

Posted by: Megan on August 19, 2005 03:11 PM

I am no Lefty troll. Go see my site for my posts on Israel today.

I have always believed in our cause. You guys are right in saying that the war probably just gave them an excuse to blow themselves up, but probably they would have done so anyway. That is why I said some people.

Fighting this war is the right thing to do. It is the right thing for the Iraqi people and it is the right thing for the War on Terror. If we leave before we are done, then we are back to where we were before 9/11 when our enemy thought we were weak.

I hate that I gave the impression that I think the war is wrong. Again, my comment was meant say that even if more terrorists are recruited, that at least we get to kill them! Without the war they would have still joined the terrorists and would be lurking in the shadows. At least we have a venue to kill them before they get here.

Posted by: WunderKraut on August 19, 2005 03:29 PM

I hate that I gave the impression that I think the war is wrong.

No, sweetie, you came out so gung ho on it that I figured you were making fun of us.

After I visited your website, I saw you were sincere and I apologized.

:)

Posted by: Sue Dohnim on August 19, 2005 03:39 PM

Sue,

Ok, great :-) Sometimes I write a comment and after reading it and seeing how others took it, I wish I could take it back or revise it.

I got a little defensive, sorry. Long day and week, plus I have this terrible patch of poison ivy on my right arm....no seriously....it is bad....My surveyors tell me to put gas or bleach on it.....

Stay tuned to see if WunderKraut lives through the weekend.

Posted by: WunderKraut on August 19, 2005 03:43 PM

WunderKraut, now I owe you clarification and a bit of an apology - I wasn't actually disagreeing with you, just trying to reinforce what you were saying. It's just that so often, I hear war opponents claim, directly or indirectly, that our actions are making terrorists out of folks that, absent a US presence, would be kite-flying puppy-huggers brimming with kumbayah. It ain't true, you know it, I know you know it, and I was just trying to clarify that further.

Posted by: Rocketeer on August 19, 2005 04:06 PM

"My surveyors tell me to put gas or bleach on it"

Proceed with caution! There's probably a good reason they're surveyors and not doctors :)

Posted by: BrewFan on August 19, 2005 04:06 PM

P.S. - On the poison ivy, get some plug tobacco from the drugstore, put a chunk in a washcloth, wet it, mash it, and rub the affected area down with it every couple of hours. It works, I swear.

Posted by: Rocketeer on August 19, 2005 04:08 PM

P.P.S. - I'm not even a surveyor, much less a doctor, so factor that into your decision as to whether or not to follow my advice.

Posted by: Rocketeer on August 19, 2005 04:11 PM

Duly noted :-)

Posted by: WunderKraut on August 19, 2005 04:12 PM

"the poll question "do you approve of the way President Bush is conducting the war"? misses a whole lot of people who support the war but don't think Bush is doing enough."

This is true - it completely ignores the "kill'em all and let god sort'em out" somewhere to the right of Ghengis Kahn crowd".

Posted by: on August 19, 2005 04:16 PM

WK, I'm pretty allergic to the stuff (have reacted to smoke from firewood that had poison ivy growing on it)..

Go see your doc or a PA and let him prescribe prednisone - or a similar oral steroid. Knocks it back fast.

Posted by: Dave in Texas on August 19, 2005 04:40 PM
it’s time for all of America to stand together, put on the big boy pants, and get through the next few years.

That's golden.

Posted by: Master of None on August 19, 2005 04:45 PM

Go out and cut some jewelweed and press the juice from the stem. Apply to poison ivy rash.

Stings a bit at first but it does help dry it out.

Posted by: lauraw on August 19, 2005 04:55 PM

Oh, shoot. I saw the title and assumed the article was about Republican senator Chuck Hagel saying Bush should've met with the woman and posted accordingly.

Wow. First time I've ever said anything stupid on the internet.

Posted by: S. Weasel on August 19, 2005 05:17 PM

What's jewelweed? Does it grow in the cracks in the parking lot at Zales?

Posted by: Dave in Texas on August 19, 2005 05:30 PM

I thought "jewelweed" was just a fancy-pants word for pot.

Posted by: Rocketeer on August 19, 2005 05:32 PM

This was the best line I've seen in addressing the chickenhawk issue. From a commenter on Scott Randolph's post. Actually it's in a post above the linked one.

I’m troubled by what I read on some of the above posts. People saying things like “shut up and enlist if you love this war” etc, etc. Those people are stupid. To equate supporting something as being legitimate only if you’re doing that something is not a standard anybody needs to live up to. Support abortion or gay rights? Ever had an abortion/are you gay? No? Then shut up, get an abortion/a boyfriend you hypocrite. Sounds stupid, doesn’t it. Because it is.”

Me: Do you support Gay Rights?
He: Yes I do. Strongly.
Me: (unzipping my pants) Then try this.
He: I support gay rights-I don't do gay sex.
Me: AHAAA-a Chickencocksucker.

Posted by: tom scott on August 19, 2005 06:09 PM

Tom Scott, I reserve the right to steal that "chickencocksucker" argument on numerous future occasions. Nicely done.

Posted by: utron on August 19, 2005 06:33 PM

Wunder,

No misunderstanding by me. I am totally picking up on where you are coming from. I think your support for TGWOT and for Isreal's self-defense are great.

I just have a real hard time believing our pre-emptive war is causing terrorism, that's all. Good work on your blog, BTW.

Posted by: Log Cabin on August 19, 2005 09:09 PM

Cindy Sheehan is not a strategy. Once again the Dems confuse attacking Bush with presenting an alternate strategy. When I see her on TV, all I can think is that I have absolutely nothing in common with this woman.

Posted by: insider on August 20, 2005 01:40 AM

Once again the Dems confuse attacking Bush with presenting an alternate strategy

Shhhh... we don't want them to realize this.

Posted by: tony on August 20, 2005 02:21 AM

oooooooh, lookee. bloggy mcblogblog decided to change his mind. what a remarkable sea change, that. pull up the tent stakes, folks. no, on second thought, leave the tent stakes, the porta-potties, the fallen soldier memorials, etc. -- the larry northern volunteer militia will be by shortly to clean up.

volunteers can apply below.

Posted by: dave. on August 20, 2005 04:28 AM

Worthy of note: Matt "moonbat" Lauer gets slamdunked.

http://newsbusters.org/media/TodaySoldier.wmv

Posted by: on August 20, 2005 05:02 AM

That is an awesome video. LOL
Wish it were longer.

Posted by: lauraw on August 20, 2005 11:46 AM

I have yet to see any moonbat cry "Clinton lied. Soldiers died." for any of his nefarious military excursions when trying to get attention turned away from Monica, the stained dress and nasty cigar. Not that it's surprising to see a double standard from the leftists. All stripes of moonbat/leftist/socialist/communist/moderate/stupid people cling to the two-standard reference of morality.

Posted by: Carlos on August 20, 2005 05:35 PM

carlos, when ya got nothing, ya drag clinton into it. well, clinton -- the best republican president ever -- is hanging out with 41, trading wisecracks about 43.

if ya wanna compare sucky past presidents to 43, start with nixon, then hoover, coolidge and truman.

then go wash your twat. i can smell ya from here.

Posted by: dave. on August 21, 2005 12:07 AM

dave.:

You are a quality troll -- please keep visiting. I personally agree that Clinton was one of the better Republican presidents.

Posted by: Michael on August 21, 2005 07:03 PM

I mean, Slick Willy earned my respect when he took on the unions and got NAFTA passed. Let's be honest, that took guts.

You, dave., can also earn my respect if you drop to your knees and give me a Monica.

Posted by: Michael on August 21, 2005 07:16 PM

Clinton earned my respect when he did Monica in the oval office and then peacefully brazened it out after getting caught. Teddy would have just taken her for a ride... ;->

The wussy euro politicians would have resigned when faced with a scandal of that sort.

He's a lecherous adultering scoundrel of course, but is a scoundrel who understood exactly what the public was willing to tolerate and took it right to the ragged edge.

Posted by: Tony on August 22, 2005 08:32 PM

Cindy Sheehan is dishonoring her son Casey in several ways. One way she dishonors him is by omitting what his own views on the Iraq war was and synthesizing her own personal views with his. I find it strange that she says her son was against the war in Iraq, but yet Casey Sheehen reenlisted in the army of his own volition, that just doesn’t comport with Cindy Sheehan’s statements. This is a 100 % volunteer military, there is no conscription and that begs the question as to why Casey Sheehan reenlisted in a war he opposed, if that is even true. If perhaps Casey Sheehan disagreed with certain aspects of the war in Iraq e.g..he felt maybe we needed more troops in Iraq, or more armor on humvee’s or better food for the troops etc., then that should be explained by Cindy Sheehan without the partisan hyperbole. A person can complain about particular conditions in Iraq without opposing the entire war in Iraq you know. During another interview on national television Cindy Sheehan stated that her son was killed by friendly fire, when she was pressed about that statement she then said ” well I have speculative evidence that he was killed by friendly fire.” It’s amazing that anyone could use the words speculative and evidence in the same sentence side by side and keep a straight face. Evidence substantiates an allegation, speculation is just the opposite it requires no evidence at all,to use “speculative evidence” together is a perfect example of an oxymoron. The real truth of Casey Sheehan’s death is he was killed by hostile fire in Sadr City, this was the consistent report of his death since day one, medical reports and the reports from fellow soldiers who were present at his death confirm the same fact. Casey Sheehan was a real hero of the first order, when a convoy of soldiers from his unit was attacked in Sadr City he volunteered to join a rescue force to get them out, even after his commanding Sergeant told him he didn’t have to go because he was a mechanic and not an infantryman. Casey was reported telling his officer ” I go where my chief goes.” Thats not a man who didn’t believe in his cause or his duty, thats a hero. Casey Sheehan’s family has released this statement and I quote ” We do not agree with the political motivations and publicity tactics of Cindy Sheehan. She now appears to be promoting her own personal agenda and notoriety at the the expense of her son’s good name and reputation.”

Posted by: William Leatherwood on August 22, 2005 10:12 PM
Post a comment
Name:


Email Address:


URL:


Comments:


Remember info?








Now Available!
The Deplorable Gourmet
A Horde-sourced Cookbook
[All profits go to charity]
Top Headlines
What? Skeleton of the most famous Musketeer, D'Artagnan, possibly discovered in Dutch church closet.
Dumas picked four names of real musketeers out of a history book, D'Artagnan, Athos, Aramis, and Porthos. So there was an actual D'Artagnan, though he made most of the story up. (Or, you know, all of it.)*
Charles de Batz de Castelmore, known as d'Artagnan, the famous musketeer of Kings Louis XIII and Louis XIV, spent his life in the service of the French crown.
The Gascon nobleman inspired Alexandre Dumas's hero in "The Three Musketeers" in the 19th century, a character now known worldwide thanks to the novel and numerous film adaptations.
D'Artagnan was killed during the siege of Maastricht in 1673, and there is a statue honoring the musketeer in the city. His final resting place has remained a mystery ever since.

A lot of Dumas's stories are based on bits of real history. The plot of the >Three Musketeers, about trying to recover lost diamonds from the queen's necklace, was cribbed from the then-almost-contemporaneous Affair of the Queen's Necklace. And the Man in the Iron Mask is based on real accounts of a prisoner forced to wear a mask (though I think it was a velvet mask).
* Oh, I should mention, Dumas says all this, about finding the names in an old book, in the prologue to his novel. But authors lie a lot. They frequently present fictions as based on historic fact. The twist is, he was actually telling the truth here. At least about these four musketeers having actually existed and served under Louis XIV.
Fun fact: You know the beginning of A Fistful of Dollars where the local gunslingers make fun of Clint Eastwood's donkey and Eastwood demands they apologize to the donkey? That's lifted from The Three Musketeers. Rochefort mocks D'Artagnan's old, brokedown farm horse and D'Artagnan is incensed.
A commenter asked which should be read first, The Hobbit of LOTR?
Easy, no question -- read The Hobbit first. It's actually the start of the story and comes first chronologically. It sets up some major characters and major pieces in play in LOTR.
Also, the Hobbit is Beginner-Friendly, which LOTR isn't. The Hobbit really is a delightful book, and a fast read. It's chatty, it's casual, it's exciting, and it's funny. In that dry cheeky British humor way. I love that the narrator is constantly making little asides and commentary, like he's just sitting next to you telling you this story as it occurs to him.
LOTR is a very long story. Fifteen hundred pages or so. The Hobbit is relatively short and very punchy and easy to read. If you don't like The Hobbit, you can skip out on LOTR. If you do like it, you'll be primed to read LOTR.
Oh, I should say: The Hobbit is written as if it's for children, but one of those smart children's stories that are also for adults. Don't worry, there's also real fighting and violence and horror in it, too.
LOTR is written for adults. (It's said that Tolkien wrote both for his children, but LOTR was written 17 years later, when his children were adults.) Some might not like The Hobbit due to its sometimes frivolous tone. Me, I love it. I find it constantly amusing. Both are really good but there is a starkly different tone to both. LOTR is epic, grand, and serious, about a world war, The Hobbit is light and breezy, and about a heist. Though a heist that culminates in a war for the spoils.
The Hobbit Challenge: Read two more chapters. I didn't have much time. Bilbo got the ring.
I noticed a continuity problem. Maybe. Now, as of the time of The Hobbit, it was unknown that this magic ring was in fact a Ring of Power, and it was doubly unknown that it was the Ring of Power, the Master Ring that controlled the others.
But the narrator -- who we will learn in LOTR was none of than Bilbo himself, who wrote the book as "There and Back Again" -- says this about Gollum's ring:
"But who knows how Gollum had come by that present [the Ring], ages ago in the old days when such rings were still at large in the world? Perhaps even the Master who ruled them could not have said."
In another passage, the ring is identified as a "ring of power."
I don't know, I always thought there was a distinction between mere magic rings and the Rings of Power created by Sauron. But this suggests that Bilbo knew this was a ring of power created by Sauron.
Now I don't remember when Bilbo wrote the Hobbit. In the movie, he shows Frodo the book in Rivendell, and I guess he wrote it after he left the Shire. I guess he might have added in the part about the ring being a ring of power created by "the Master" after Gandalf appraised him of his research into the ring.
I never noticed this before. I know Tolkien re-wrote this chapter while he was writing LOTR to make the ring important from the start. And also to make Gollum more sinister and evil, and also to remove the part where Gollum actually offers Bilbo the ring as a "present" -- Bilbo had already found it on his own, but Gollum was wiling to give it away, which obviously is not something the rewritten Gollum would ever do.
But I had no memory of the ring being suggested to be The Ring so early in the tale.
Finish the job, Mr. President!
Melanie Phillips lays out the case for the total destruction of the Iranian government and armed forces. [CBD]
CJN podcast 1400 copy.jpg
Podcast: Sefton and CBD talk about how would a peace treaty with Iran work, Democrats defending murderers and rapists, The GOP vs. Dem bench for 2028, composting bodies? And more!
Oh, I forgot to mention this quote from Pete Hegseth, reported by Roger Kimball: "We are sharing the ocean with the Iranian Navy. We're giving them the bottom half."
Forgotten 80s Mystery Click: Red Leather Suit and Sweatband Edition
And I was here to please
I'm even on knees
Makin' love to whoever I please
I gotta do it my way
Or no way at all
Tomorrow is March 25th, "Tolkien Reading Day," because March 25th is the day when the Ring is destroyed in the book. I think I'm going to start the Hobbit tomorrow and read all four books this time.
The only bad part of the trilogy are the Frodo/Sam chapters in The Two Towers. They're repetitive, slow, and mostly about the weather and terrain. But most everything else is good. Weirdly, the Frodo-Sam chapters in Return of the King are exciting and action-packed and among the best in the trilogy. (Though the chapters with everyone else in Return of the King get pretty slow again. Mostly people talking about marching towards war, and then marching towards war.)
Forgotten 80s Mystery Click
One day I'm gonna write a poem in a letter
One day I'm gonna get that faculty together
Remember that everybody has to wait in line
Oh, [Song Title], look out world, oh, you know I've got mine
US decimation of Iran's ICBM forces is due to Space Force's instant detection of launches -- and the launchers' hiding places -- and rapid counter-attack via missiles
AI is doing a lot of the work in analyzing images to find the exact hiding place of the launchers. Counter-strikes are now coming in four hours after a launch, whereas previously it might have taken days for humans to go over the imagery and data.
Robert Mueller, Former Special Counsel Who Probed Trump, Dies
“robert mueller just died,” trump wrote in a truth social post on march 21. “good, i’m glad he’s dead. he can no longer hurt innocent people! president donald j. trump.”
Canadian School Designates Cafeteria And Lunchroom As "No Food Zones" For Ramadan
Canada and the UK are neck and neck in the race to become the first western country to fall to Islam [CBD]
CJN podcast 1400 copy.jpg
Podcast: Sefton and CBD have a short chat about Iran, the disgusting SAVE Act theater, Mamdani's politicizing of St. Patrick's Day, and more!
Recent Comments
rickb223 [/b][/s][/u][/i]: "The post number on the previous posting was old: i ..."

mick dorris: "73 [i]What in the Wide Wide World of Sports is a-g ..."

It's me donna: "70 "Tolkien Reading Day 6" Update: I just finis ..."

Sponge - F*ck Cancer: "[i] Thanks for posting this URL, Sponge. Posted b ..."

mikeski: "[i]Seems like the news on this page is toreadors a ..."

Taggart: "What in the Wide Wide World of Sports is a-going o ..."

Tex Lovera: "56 The post number on the previous posting was old ..."

Martini Farmer: "Remember the special election in Florida that went ..."

"Perfessor" Squirrel: ""Tolkien Reading Day 6" Update: I just finished ..."

XTC: "66 Where the hell is this? Because it doesn't come ..."

Sponge - F*ck Cancer: "I saw Bleeding Pixels open for Technotronic at Chu ..."

Tex Lovera: "53 49 However, they DO keep asking me to go check ..."

Bloggers in Arms
Some Humorous Asides
Archives