| 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
At what point do conspiracy theories go too far?
The Classical Saturday Morning Coffee Break & Prayer Revival Daily Tech News 9 May 2026 Into The Valley Of The Shadow Of ONT Rode The 400 Barrel of Monkeys Cafe Democrats Melt Down Over Virginia Supreme Court Ruling, with Socialist Democrat Influencer Hasan Piker Demanding Violent Revolution and the "Smart" Commentators of the Left Unable to Read a Simple Court Decision Quick Hits/The Week In Woke Combo Thread DOJ Will Denaturalize 12 Cultural Enrichment Officers Who Lied About Their War Crimes and Support for Terrorism Reform Gains Over 1,300 Seats as Labour Loses Nearly 1,200 US Launches Airstrikes Against Iranian Targets, Stops 70+ Iranian Oil Tankers from Evading the Blockade Absent Friends
Captain Whitebread 2026
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
Texas MoMe 2026: 10/16/2026-10/17/2026 Corsicana,TX Contact Ben Had for info |
« Al Qaeda Killed Kenny? |
Main
| Letting A Smile Be Your Umbrella, And Other Ways To Get Yourself Dead »
November 29, 2005
Please Don't Out Personal/Private Information About Anyone, Even TrollsI missed the whole controversy. A poster kinda-sorta erred by posting a picture of a troll and his family. I say "kinda-sorta," because the guy had it up on a website (assuming it was him at all). Still, he didn't offer that connection to his personal life himself, and it's not cool to post stuff like that. I was just on a site -- I don't think I'll bother to say which one, because I don't want to give them traffic* -- where the proprietors or someone involved began researching the IP's of conservative interlopers and outing the place of work they were posting from. It's not really such horribly damaging information, but it's creepy and threatening. I don't know what someone could do with such information to really harm you, but the implied statement is "I can get to you personally. I can do things to screw up your life." Empty threat? I don't know. I know it's possible to find the exact location someone's posting from with the right software. And with that-- who knows? Monty and others were wise to caution against this, the guy who posted it manned up and confessed error and asked to have the information edited out of the post, and Laura did the right thing by honoring the request. Thanks, all. And to the poster whose picture may (or may not) have been linked-- I apologize for that. You're annoying as hell, and you evade any point you don't have a glib answer for, but we deal in arguments (and insults) here, not in the public revelation of private information with the nasty insinuation that more might be coming. As Monty (I think) said, "That's the way we don't roll." Again, sorry I missed this controversy, and good on Laura for fixing it. And yes, Laura, I trust your judgement on these things and I don't think it's likely you're ever going to do something that makes me recoil in horror.
Edited: I took out the name of the poster who put the link up, because people thought I was picking on him, which wasn't my intention at all. It wasn't the worst thing ever done, he decided it was wrong, he asked for it to be edited out. I'm just noting all this not to call attention to what was specifically done, which wasn't all that terrible, but to make it clear that it's just not a cool area to get into. posted by Ace at 08:33 PM
CommentsWhatever. Guy posts provocative diatribes and family pictures under the same unusual moniker, and several somebodys Google it. That isn't even in the same universe as, say, posting an invisible IP sniffer in a thread, following the dotted quad upstream, discovering the attached employer and narking to the boss. But, you know. Whatever. Posted by: S. Weasel on November 29, 2005 08:41 PM
that's just the whole integrity kick we're on Posted by: Dave in Texas on November 29, 2005 08:42 PM
Jeesh. This was handled quietly about 12 hours ago. I'm no fan of geoff but why don't you make him feel more crappy than he already does for a minor faux pas. It must be the nyquil talking. Posted by: on November 29, 2005 08:44 PM
Now, if we could just do something about the numb nuts here that can't be bothered to put a made up name on a comment... Posted by: BrewFan on November 29, 2005 08:48 PM
I don't want Geoff to be singled out here. I don't know exactly how, but I'm sure I'm to blame for all of this. Fine, whatever. By the way, I know I make some over-the-top statements at times to push my point across. 90% of what I say is tongue-in-cheek. 9% is serious and thoughtful. The last 1% is my over-use of hyphenated words. What I mean to say is don't take everything I write so literally (except for the stuff about homos). P.S. Tubino is still a piece of shit, though. And thanks to geoff, I now know where he lives.
Just A
Posted by: Bart on November 29, 2005 08:51 PM
Michael is, most likely, a profoundly gay man. Posted by: lauraw on November 29, 2005 08:52 PM
S. Weasel, No, it's not the same, but it's the same kind of idea. And if you re-read what I wrote, I think you'll see I didn't exactly take Geoff out to the woodshed. I said he kinda-sorta erred, and I said he manned up, and I also noted, as you did, that the guy had the picture up himself. Posted by: ace on November 29, 2005 08:57 PM
And he wears tights. And brags about it. Posted by: Lipstick on November 29, 2005 08:58 PM
I think the whole thing speaks well of the crew here (geoff included); that's why I hang out here. I hope geoff does't feel crappy, because he did the right thing, and intended no wrong to begin with. But this kind of thing can lead to "unintended consequences" disasters via the all-seeing eye of Google and Yahoo. There's a long and fruitful topic for discussion on the whole topic of privacy in the digital (and nano-tech) age. Is it a right or a privilege? Are there rules of etiquette? What are they? We are writing history right now, and it pleases me that we are trying to do it right. Attaboys all around, geoff included. Posted by: Monty on November 29, 2005 09:01 PM
http://anonymouse.org/anonwww.html That's a link for an easy to use html anonymizer. Pop in the address and you're fine. For a better solution, google "anonymous + public + proxy + server", find a list and start popping different server addresses into your browser's connection settings. In Firefox, Tools > Options > General > Connection settings > Manual Proxy Configuration. Once you put in those settings, just turn them on anytime you think someone might fuck with you. They'll get an IP but it will be to some random server in Mexico City, Seoul or Milwaukee. Word to the wise, if you're doing this from work, this won't keep your internal admin from seeing what you're doing. Posted by: 1234 on November 29, 2005 09:02 PM
Michael is, most likely, a profoundly gay man Posted by: BrewFan on November 29, 2005 09:03 PM
No, it's not the same, but it's the same kind of idea. Yeah. In the same way Abu Ghraib and Auschwitz are the same kind of idea. In an idiotically superficial way. But, hey, I've been doing this online thing since 1985. What do I know? I'll just go over there and put some panties on my head in penance, shall I? Posted by: S. Weasel on November 29, 2005 09:04 PM
Monty, I agree. I don't think what Geoff did was so horrid to begin with, and I thought it was classy to say he erred (even to the extent he did). That's why I didn't really think I was beating up on Geoff in the first place. Still, while this wasn't so bad, I wanted to make my preference about this clear. Posted by: ace on November 29, 2005 09:05 PM
S., I guess this is when I, too, say "Whatever." I've more or less agreed with you in broad terms but unless I agree to your precise phraseology, I'm an asshole. As you say, "Whatever." Posted by: ace on November 29, 2005 09:08 PM
You know, sometimes I think we suffer from remorse. Like it's a virus or something. Posted by: Dave in Texas on November 29, 2005 09:12 PM
I suffered from 'remorse' once, when I was a young man. Penicillin took care of it though. Posted by: BrewFan on November 29, 2005 09:15 PM
I've noticed blog threads getting more dangerous lately, everything from threats and private emails to the previously mentioned college incident where the professor hunted down the conservative poster. I'm afraid in the next year that politics may turn into violence like it did in the 60's. Posted by: adolfo velasquez on November 29, 2005 09:21 PM
Brew and Dave, can you guys be serious for two minutes? Sheesh. Is everything an opportunity for a one-liner or a jab at someone? Monty, while you're on your pedestal, could you explain the origins of Kwanza to us? Posted by: Bart on November 29, 2005 09:22 PM
Is everything an opportunity for a one-liner or a jab at someone? Pretty much. Posted by: BrewFan on November 29, 2005 09:24 PM
Hey, now that this is all straightened out, can we get back to talking about, well, me? Or do I have to go ahead with my plan of drawing a stick figure labeled "Melissa Theuriau" giving a hand job to another stick figure named "Ted" while the latter points his enormous wang toward an American flag? That's the kind of dissent I like to call the deepest form of patriotism. Posted by: Ted Rall on November 29, 2005 09:27 PM
BTW Bart, Hope this helps! Posted by: BrewFan on November 29, 2005 09:27 PM
Monty, while you're on your pedestal, could you explain the origins of Kwanza to us? I could, but why should I? What's the benefit to me? Who'll be paying me my honorarium? And of course I'll require a limo, bottled water, and various fresh fruits in my dressing room. My people will contact your people with full details, along with the names of my business manager and entourage.
Posted by: Monty on November 29, 2005 09:31 PM
Mrs. Toobino was kinda-sorta hot. What a shame. Posted by: on November 29, 2005 09:34 PM
Gee, why do I think Tubino has just joined us? Posted by: Bart on November 29, 2005 09:35 PM
Good job! Traffic Santa linked to this post! Made you look. :) Posted by: Guy T. on November 29, 2005 09:38 PM
me hav cunfeshun. michal is my illigitimit son Posted by: spurwind plover on November 29, 2005 09:40 PM
lol! Posted by: BrewFan on November 29, 2005 09:41 PM
Brew and Dave, can you guys be serious for two minutes? two consecutive minutes? Posted by: Dave in Texas on November 29, 2005 09:45 PM
"Lonestar, now you see that evil shall always triumph, because good is dumb" Lord Dark Helmet. Posted by: Iblis on November 29, 2005 09:45 PM
Finally, plover makes some goddamn sense. Posted by: Sortelli on November 29, 2005 09:49 PM
So, Plover (or should I say, Mom), I was rereading an old thread about a week ago just for fun, and you had posted a comment two or three days after the thread had expired. Curious, I checked some other lengthy, long dead threads, and you kept showing up as a commenter two or three days after the thread had expired. What's up with that? Do you save your best stuff for when nobody is listening? C'mon, Mom. Break out of your shell. Posted by: Michael on November 29, 2005 10:00 PM
Sigh. Well, my chagrin-meter is maxed. Now I'm keeping fine company with Andrew Sullivan, Nattering Ninny. Thanks for all the edifying comments (and the others, as well). But I'd like to think that some good could come from this, so . . . perhaps this thread could be turned into a flamethread? Posted by: geoff on November 29, 2005 10:04 PM
perhaps this thread could be turned into a flamethread? oh now it's "hurt me, hurt me" is it?
Posted by: Dave in Texas on November 29, 2005 10:08 PM
oh now it's "hurt me, hurt me" is it? Doesn't have to be me in particular, of course. In fact I encourage you to explore the space. Guitar-humping Christmas fag. Posted by: geoff on November 29, 2005 10:12 PM
Hey Dave, I really enjoyed your little homespun tale about how the nostalgia tree got shuttled to the back room. Did it ever occur to you that, instead of having your bizarre tacky tradition pooped upon, you may have been lucky enough to have married a classy dame? Maybe this should have crossed your mind when she threw away all your waistbands-and-shreds you used to call 'underwear,' dressed you correctly, took down the Abba posters, put up curtains, tossed your parachute pants, and taught you how to clean the crust out of your eyes before you left the house. I'm just posing an inquiry here. This is not a flame. Posted by: lauraw on November 29, 2005 10:25 PM
Great point, Laura. That's what guys are looking for from women -- somneone to tell us what to do and make us live differently than we'd like. You take that, snuggling, talking, and all the whining and bitching around your periods (what do they last now? Three weeks straight?), and it's no wonder we love you so. Posted by: ace on November 29, 2005 10:28 PM
Jeebus! Posted by: harrison on November 29, 2005 10:29 PM
lauraw, I thought about that for a few minutes. Then I dismissed it completely. She's just a snob. Still, that's good for me. that crap about cars and boys and college made you cry, didn't it? It's ok toots. Our little secret. Posted by: Dave in Texas on November 29, 2005 10:30 PM
From earlier thread: Hey, AoSHQCQCD! Has anybody ever told you that you are not, in fact, particularly funny? Yes, Weasel, I have been told that many times, but I don't care, because, frankly, I crack myself up all the time. Has anyone told you that you are not, in fact, a particularly good cocksucker? To quote Laura: I'm just posing an inquiry here. This is not a flame. Posted by: AOSHQ Comment Quality Control Department on November 29, 2005 10:33 PM
Doesn't have to be me in particular, of course. In fact I encourage you to explore the space. Guitar-humping Christmas fag. From the rumours I've heard about you, I wouldn't talk about "exploring" any type of "space", Semen-slurping ass-bandit. With Love, hot kisses and copious back-scrubbing... Posted by: cheshirecat on November 29, 2005 10:40 PM
I know it doesn't sound so attractive to you, Ace, since you like the Frathouse-cum-Cum lifestyle, but some men really do like women, and appreciate a fine home. No, really! Posted by: lauraw on November 29, 2005 10:44 PM
Great point, Laura. That's what guys are looking for from women -- somneone to tell us what to do and make us live differently than we'd like. Actually, that's what Mrs. Michael does. Except for the Batman suit (which she doesn't know about). So, I can't go to work with crust in my eyes. Does that make me a faggot? Living with a woman is really complicated. Thank God the pool boy gives me some time to myself. Posted by: Michael on November 29, 2005 10:44 PM
With Love, hot kisses and copious back-scrubbing... Uh, what were we talking about? Posted by: geoff on November 29, 2005 10:46 PM
Ace, I realize that women aren't really people in the strictest sense of the word, but we sort of have to be nice to them or they won't put out. The key is to find a stupid chick who has lots of tattoos and low self-esteem. And big hooters. Posted by: Monty on November 29, 2005 10:48 PM
...but some men really do like women, and appreciate a fine home. Yes, we call these men "Homosexuals." Posted by: ace on November 29, 2005 10:48 PM
Does that make me a faggot? No, it's not that. geoff, you have made an impression tonight! Posted by: Dave in Texas on November 29, 2005 10:50 PM
Uh, what were we talking about? You tease... Posted by: cheshirecat on November 29, 2005 10:51 PM
So, if I had Cedarford's real name and address you guy's wouldn't be interested? I miss the classic trolls. Posted by: digitalbrownshirt on November 29, 2005 10:54 PM
Monty, Yes, we have to "be nice to them" of course, and really listen, and by "listen," I mean ignore them, but simply wait for "response cues" (when their incessant high-pitched nonsensical babbling ends for three seconds) to offer an appropriate answer: 1. "Yes, everyone at your workplace sucks. You're much better than they are." 2. "You're right, she shouldn't have said that. She's a bitch. Actually, she should be slapped around like the dirty whore she is." 3. "Do those pants make your ass look fat? Hah-- fat like a fox!" Posted by: ace on November 29, 2005 10:57 PM
Yes, we have to "be nice to them" of course I do this by using little terms of endearment like this: "Why, no, your astonishing weight gain does not make you less attractive to me! I like a woman with some meat on her bones! Now roll your ginormous keister into the kitchen and make me a sammy, Sasquatch." Posted by: Monty on November 29, 2005 11:05 PM
Now roll your ginormous keister into the kitchen and make me a sammy, Sasquatch against counsel's advice, I'm sure. Posted by: Dave in Texas on November 29, 2005 11:16 PM
So, if I had Cedarford's real name and address you guy's wouldn't be interested? I miss the classic trolls. Hah! I was right! BRING BACK CEDARFORD! Posted by: Michael on November 29, 2005 11:17 PM
Posted by: Roy on November 29, 2005 11:21 PM
against counsel's advice, I'm sure. Apparently, there's some "mental anguish" clause in the divorce statutes which stipulates that calling one's spouse "Sasquatch" entitles that spouse to your entire DVD collection. It was an expensive lesson, but a good one to take into my next disaster...ah, relationship. How hard can it be to find a gorgeous yet dumb woman with DD pontoons who is willing to subject herself to the filthiest acts imaginable in the privacy of the bedchamber and yet will retain a maidenly modesty while in public? Is that so much to ask? I mean, it's not like women are precisely people, but even so, you'd think there'd be one or two of these creatures roaming about! Pfft. You see how sensitive I am! And my ex told me I lacked empathy and never paid enough attention to her. Or something like that; I wasn't really listening. Posted by: Monty on November 29, 2005 11:25 PM
Is that so much to ask? oh preachin to the choir brother, preachin to the choir. personally I think it takes a hell of a lot of money. call it a working theory. Posted by: Dave in Texas on November 29, 2005 11:29 PM
BRING BACK CEDARFORD! Uh, no. I hope they bury him with his face under Pat Buchanan's asscrack, as Seedy's last will and testament dictates. Posted by: Sue Dohnim on November 29, 2005 11:30 PM
Michael is, most likely, a profoundly gay man. When did he become profound? Posted by: VRWC Agent on November 29, 2005 11:30 PM
That is IT. I'm putting you rat-bastards in the newsletter. You know we women have one, right? All your gonads are gonna be in drydock for the next six months. Posted by: lauraw on November 29, 2005 11:30 PM
All your gonads are gonna be in drydock for the next six months. You think that's a threat to this crew? Cheese it, copper. We can do six months standin' on our heads. Posted by: ace on November 29, 2005 11:32 PM
Yes, we have to "be nice to them" of course, and really listen, and by "listen," I mean ignore them, but simply wait for "response cues" (when their incessant high-pitched nonsensical babbling ends for three seconds) to offer an appropriate answer No, no, no, Ace. There's more to it. You have to make and hold eye contact, for long periods of time (up to 20 seconds) while you're pretending to be interested. And you have to control your blink rate. It takes practice. Posted by: Michael on November 29, 2005 11:33 PM
Hey guys, I'm here. . . what I miss? Oh. Never mind. Cheers, Posted by: Dave at Garfield Ridge on November 29, 2005 11:33 PM
I'm putting you rat-bastards in the newsletter. You know we women have one, right? Wait...you're saying that women read? I thought you were a guy! Who taught you? Are you like some freak of nature, or can just any woman read? And does your little newsletter have actual "news", or does it just have stuff about celebrities and dieting and how to please a man (i.e., a real person) in the sack? See, this is just strange to me. It's like finding out your dog can talk, or something. Say something else! This is kind of cool, in a freaky way! Posted by: Monty on November 29, 2005 11:41 PM
Shortly after the operation. Posted by: lauraw on November 29, 2005 11:45 PM
I do this by using little terms of endearment like this: "Why, no, your astonishing weight gain does not make you less attractive to me! I like a woman with some meat on her bones! Now roll your ginormous keister into the kitchen and make me a sammy, Sasquatch." Stop! Please, Monty, stop! If I don't stop laughing uncontrollably, Mrs. Michael is going to come into the smoke-infested den and want to know what's so funny. Posted by: Michael on November 29, 2005 11:58 PM
Men are so simple and easy. Put out at least once a day and they are pliable, happy puppies who will do whatever you want. That is your free peek into the newsletter. Posted by: Lipstick on November 30, 2005 12:04 AM
Apparently, there's some "mental anguish" clause in the divorce statutes which stipulates that calling one's spouse "Sasquatch" entitles that spouse to your entire DVD collection. It was an expensive lesson, but a good one to take into my next disaster...ah, relationship. Um, I have repeatedly referred to Lipstick as a "Sasquatch". I have an extensive DVD collection. Lipstick, honey, I just don't think we are right for each other. I hereby withdraw my proposal. Maybe I should have mentioned that I'm already married to Mrs. Michael. If I forgot this, I'm sorry. We will always have the memory of those two nights in Reno! Posted by: on November 30, 2005 12:23 AM
Previous comment was me. Sorry, Lipstick. Posted by: Michael on November 30, 2005 12:24 AM
Darling heart Lipstick, I've been with the same guy for eight years, married for seven. I love him more than my first love, which seems unbelievable to me. Before that I was with my first love for nine years. In between them was a year of searching (and some near-misses thank goodness). But I digress. Posted by: lauraw on November 30, 2005 12:27 AM
Face now shut. I will not reveal any more secrets of the newsletter. Very, very bad of me. And Michael, was that you crying outside my hotel room in Reno? Sorry that security got a little nasty and called you a sissy and laughed at your batman suit. 'Night all. Posted by: Lipstick on November 30, 2005 12:34 AM
For a moment there I thought Lauraw was going to tell us about her sex life. Which of course I'd be interested in since I am heterosexual. A damn proud heterosexual. Posted by: Bart on November 30, 2005 12:37 AM
Michael was rejected at my door just prior to him coming to you in Reno, Lipstick. Since Mrs. Michael is giving it up to a few 'friends' she doesn't have time for him - hence, his desperate attempts to find 'love' elsewhere. Fair warning ladies, if Batman comes knockin' don't invite him in. Posted by: Not A Vegas Whore on November 30, 2005 12:48 AM
Hi, Civetta. I guess business is slow in Vegas. Apparently you are not busy tonight . . . Posted by: Michael on November 30, 2005 01:21 AM
So, have I heard correctly that this... is a flame thread? Posted by: sandy burger on November 30, 2005 01:29 AM
What I meant to say was, SHUT YOUR FACE. Oh. Like we don't know the Feminine Control Techniques? Like we men are just ignorant clueless schmucks who cannot figure out the immutable fact that if you women put out once a day, we will be "pliable happy puppies"? Actually, we know. And we're OK with that. No kidding. We are actually the shallow pigs you think we are, and we're OK with that. And we are constantly amused and entertained by the feminine delusion that you can change us. Posted by: Michael on November 30, 2005 01:52 AM
And we are constantly amused and entertained by the feminine delusion that you can change us. He talks pretty brave when Mrs. Michael is out of town, doesn't he? Posted by: sandy burger on November 30, 2005 02:20 AM
I am too busy and not interested in what you're hoping for, Michael. However, perhaps if you gave Mrs. Michael several bran muffins you could achieve your goals and save yourself $2,500. Posted by: Not A Vegas Whore on November 30, 2005 02:26 AM
Holy crap! Michael--are you a scat freak? Posted by: zqqz on November 30, 2005 02:38 AM
No, I am not a scat freak. In fact, I had to google "scat freak" in order to figure out WTF you were talking about. That's disgusting. I am an Upper-Middle-Class-Businessman. As such, I can offer some advice. At $2,500, Civetta (a/k/a Not A Vegas Whore) is severely overpriced. That's why she has so much time to cruise the internet. On the basis of extensive market research, I'm confident that Civetta should be in the $140 - $160 price range, consistent with her aging competitors. Posted by: Michael on November 30, 2005 03:07 AM
He talks pretty brave when Mrs. Michael is out of town, doesn't he? *Gulp* Sandy, this whole conversartion started with the ethics of personal privacy on the internet, right? Posted by: Michael on November 30, 2005 03:16 AM
Ha ha! You're a big-- (Oops, gotta run, here comes the missus. I'll make fun of you later, Michael.) Posted by: sandy burger on November 30, 2005 03:29 AM
Michael: I have run Vegas escorts in the past and what you want is referred to as "Earth, Wind and Lava". Perhaps you want more wind, but that depends on the escort's diet. I'd say maybe you leave Civetta alone because you are a problem client. Posted by: zqqz on November 30, 2005 03:39 AM
I'd say maybe you leave Civetta alone because you are a problem client. Actually, I have not really succeeded at being a "client" yet. We're talking about the cost of airfare to Vegas, and so forth. But your advice is well taken. Thanks. Posted by: Michael on November 30, 2005 03:53 AM
I love how this post was all about "standards" and "doing the right thing" and then the thread degenerated into all things wrong.....;-) If I could think of something bad enough to shock you all, I would. But you all are light years ahead of me there. On a serious note ( and I'm NOT kidding here) I think the problem with men and women is that in past generations we all looked pretty good young and by the time we were tired of our mate, we looked like hell anyway. So you made the best of it. But now, with modern whatever, we still look pretty good when we get tired of our mate, hence...fooling around. Which clearly ends up ticking EVERYONE off. This is early morning rambling. Forgive me. Posted by: Rightwingsparkle on November 30, 2005 04:46 AM
Scat, crossdressers, gay batman and to think I have not even had my eggs yet. Posted by: Cowtipper on November 30, 2005 08:12 AM
Laura, we've stopped using the newsletter, it's too slow. Just transmit the names and faces on the satellite uplink. And all you men who live with women and think you're independent macho he-men? We've tagged you like the animals on Wild Kingdom. And you actually believed those unmatched socks were due to laundry incompetence! HA! Posted by: Sue Dohnim on November 30, 2005 09:33 AM
All your gonads are belong to us! damn. more true than we'd care to admit. Posted by: Dave in Texas on November 30, 2005 09:43 AM
Why do television memories live longer than my actual memories? Sue, that sock reference is from Married With Children. Posted by: lauraw on November 30, 2005 10:27 AM
We've tagged you like the animals on Wild Kingdom. I thought that mole on my ass looked strange. Posted by: Michael on November 30, 2005 11:26 AM
Michael, So the tag sticking out of it doesn't bother you? Posted by: Rightwingsparkle on November 30, 2005 11:34 AM
I KNOW I haven't been tagged... my wife doesn't let me leave the house except with her (Apparently, I'm an "indoor pet") Posted by: JFH on November 30, 2005 11:49 AM
So the tag sticking out of it doesn't bother you? Yes, it does. The bar code makes it unsightly. Posted by: Michael on November 30, 2005 12:14 PM
Michael, Oh, that's not your barcode. That's your sin-o-meter. How do you think we women know a lil something about everything you do? Surely you have noticed the numbers changing even as you type here? ;-) Posted by: Rightwingsparkle on November 30, 2005 12:24 PM
Good heavens, Sparkle! What were you doing up at 3:30 A.M.? Let me guess, the buzzing noise awakens Mr. Sparkle until he's in REM sleep, right? Posted by: spongeworthy on November 30, 2005 01:21 PM
spongeworthy, Heh. What can I say? I couldn't sleep. And he may be a Mr. but he sure as hell doesn't sparkle. ;-) Posted by: Rightwingsparkle on November 30, 2005 03:14 PM
Sue, that sock reference is from Married With Children. I'm lame, sue me. All of us aren't comedic geniuses who post pictures of Caucasian sumo wrestlers and big-boobed nerd women on popular blogs. Posted by: Sue Dohnim on November 30, 2005 04:03 PM
I wasn't picking on you. I just realized I remembered that, and it surprised me. Posted by: lauraw on November 30, 2005 05:53 PM
Who's this nerd woman you speak of? Posted by: bbeck's boobs on November 30, 2005 05:59 PM
Boy, that Sammy Hagar's quite an entrepreneur, you know? First he's selling his own brand of tequila, then he's got a night club... Well, evidently, he's now selling a cookbook on Amazon.com. Yup, that's right, his own cookbook. It's called "There's Only One Way to Wok". ... Probably an Oriental kind of thing. ... O - kaaaaay... Posted by: Dogstar on December 1, 2005 12:19 AM
Who's this nerd woman you speak of? I was talking about the gamer girl, not bbeck. And I'm sorry Laura, I didn't mean to get catty. I guess l'm still on edge from the mother-in-law this past Turkey Day. Grrrrrrr. Posted by: on December 1, 2005 08:50 AM
See? I even forgot to sign my freakin' name. Posted by: Sue Dohnim on December 1, 2005 08:51 AM
Post a comment
| The Deplorable Gourmet A Horde-sourced Cookbook [All profits go to charity] Top Headlines
Funniest thing I've read about the Virginia mess. Back when they were hustling the referendum through the assembly both Senators, Warner and Kaine, advised them to go slow and play by the rules. Louise Lucas said she respected them but didn't need advice from the "cuck chair" in the corner. The gerrymandering was overturned and Louise is heading for the big house. Edward G. Robinson voice "where's your cuck now?" I posted his post on twitter and it's gotten 25K views so far. Thanks, Smell the Glove Chris
Forgotten 80s Mystery Click That Sums Up the Democrat Communist Party Today
Something is wrong as I hold you near Somebody else holds your heart, yeah You turn to me with your icy tears And then it's raining, feels like it's raining
"It's f**king f**ked."
-- reportedly a genuine comment offered by a "senior Labour source" Correction: I wrote that Labour is losing 88% (now 87%) of the seats it is "defending." I think that's wrong. The right way to say it is the seats they are contesting -- that is, they don't necessarily already hold these seats, but they have put up a candidate to run for the seat. It's still very bad but not as bad as losing 87% of the seats they already held. Basil the Great
"The end of the two party system in the UK" as first the Fake Conservatives and now Labour chooses political suicide rather than simply STOPPING THE INVASION
Incidentally, the only reason this didn't already happen in the US is because of the Very Bad Orange Man (who is right on 85% of all policy calls and extremely, existentially right on 15% of them)
No political party that is NOT also a doomsday religious cult would EVER choose a cataclysmic loss -- and possible extinction as a party -- to support a toxically unpopular favoritism of NON-CITIZEN ILLEGAL MIGRANTS over actual citizen voters.
Only a cult does this.
Now they've lost 84%.
Annunziata Rees-Mogg Update: They've now lost 88% of the seats they're defending. As I mentioned earlier, I think I heard that London will not bail them out, as many of those Labour seats will probably flip to "Muslim Independent" or Green. Detroit's 5am vote will not save them.
Yup, Labour is losing 80% of its seats...
The British Patriot Wow, up to 1700-2100 seats. It's not incredible that this is happening. It's incredible that the Davos crowd is so absolutely determined to privilege Muslim "migrants" over the actual native population who elects them, no matter how loudly the natives scream that they want to be prioritized, that they will gladly self-extinguish as a party rather than simply representing the interests of their own voters. Astonishing. Remember, when they call other people "cultists" -- they are the ones so imprisoned in their social reinforcement and discipline bubbles that they will choose political death rather than dare upset the Karen Enforcement Officers of their cult. Update: Now they've lost 83% of the seats they were defending. (((Dan Hodges))) Nick Lowles
STARMERGEDDON: In early returns, Reform gains 135 seats, Labour loses 90, the Fake Conservatives lose 36 (and I didn't even know they could fall any further), the Lib Dems lose 4, and the Greens gain 6. Note that the only other party gaining seats is the Greens and they're only gaining a handful of seats.
Update: Reform now up 145, Labour down 98. Labour projected to lose Wales -- where they've ruled for 27 years. Fulton County Georgia just discovered 400 boxes of ballots for Labour Update: REF +156, LAB -107, CON -45 Brutal: In four out of five council seats where Labour is defending, they've lost. 80%. I'm sure it's not this simple, but Reform is straight taking Labour's and the "Conservatives'" seats. They've lost almost exactly what Reform gained. If understand this right (and warning, I probably don't), all of London's council seats are up for election, and Labour might lose hugely there, as their old voters abandon them for Reform, Muslim Indenpendents, and the Greens. REF +190, LAB -134, CON -56.
Updates on the Labour collapse in council elections -- which wags are calling #Starmergeddon -- from Beege Welborne. There are about 5000 seats up for grabs, Labour is expected to lose 1,800, Reform will probably gain 1,580, up from... zero. So this would be more than that.
People claim that while Labour has adopted the Sharia Agenda to appeal to the million Muslims it allowed to migrate to the country, those voters are ditching Labour to vote for the Muslim Independent Party or the Greens. Delicious. This shadenfreude is going straight to my thighs. Oh, and if Starmer loses about as badly as expected, Labour will toss him out of a window Braveheart style and replace him. He will announce he is resigning to spend more time with his Gay Ukrainian Male Prostitutes.
Media bias and senationalism are as old as, well, the media:
![]() That was written by Denny O'Neill and illustrated by, get this, Frank Miller. Editor to the Stars Jim Shooter was in charge at the time. I always thought the gag was original to the comic book, but in fact the "Threat or Menace" headline was a satirical joke about media bias and sensationalism for a long while. The Harvard Lampoon used it in a parody of Life magazine: "Flying Saucers: Threat or Menace?"
Hamas is Humiliating Trump's 'Board of Peace'
[Hat Tip: TC] [CBD]
Ted Turner Dies At 87 [CBD]
Recent Comments
whig:
"Shays' Rebellion and the Whiskey Rebellion were ou ..."
Martini Farmer: "One of the places I worked at was next to a golf c ..." whig: "People compare the American Revolution to the Fren ..." whig: "That's funny. The big criticism of the American ..." Cicero (@cicero43): "It was a revolution of Upperclass merchants --- ..." The Grateful - Acta Non Verba: "Thanks to all for prayers on behalf of Mrs. E. She ..." Stateless - He ain't heavy, he's my dog: "Lol...I was on Instagram while waiting for grass t ..." Heroq: "What I learned this week from the left. Mass h ..." naturalfake: "[i]294 @290 true. AOC probably thinks she served W ..." one hour sober: ">>Sorry, Muskegon KC is the Monday show. Welp, ..." Debby Doberman Schultz: "Good morning Horde, prayers ascending for you and ..." Ace-Endorsed Author A.H. Lloyd: "Time to get moving. God be with you all! ..." Bloggers in Arms
RI Red's Blog! Behind The Black CutJibNewsletter The Pipeline Second City Cop Talk Of The Town with Steve Noxon Belmont Club Chicago Boyz Cold Fury Da Goddess Daily Pundit Dawn Eden Day by Day (Cartoon) EduWonk Enter Stage Right The Epoch Times Grim's Hall Victor Davis Hanson Hugh Hewitt IMAO Instapundit JihadWatch Kausfiles Lileks/The Bleat Memeorandum (Metablog) Outside the Beltway Patterico's Pontifications The People's Cube Powerline RedState Reliapundit Viking Pundit WizBang Some Humorous Asides
Kaboom!
Thanksgivingmanship: How to Deal With Your Spoiled Stupid Leftist Adultbrat Relatives Who Have Spent Three Months Reading Slate and Vox Learning How to Deal With You You're Fired! Donald Trump Grills the 2004 Democrat Candidates and Operatives on Their Election Loss Bizarrely I had a perfect Donald Trump voice going in 2004 and then literally never used it again, even when he was running for president. A Eulogy In Advance for Former Lincoln Project Associate and Noted Twitter Pestilence Tom Nichols Special Guest Blogger Rich "Psycho" Giamboni: If You Touch My Sandwich One More Time, I Will Fvcking Kill You Special Guest Blogger Rich "Psycho" Giamboni: I Must Eat Jim Acosta Special Guest Blogger Tom Friedman: We Need to Talk About What My Egyptian Cab Driver Told Me About Globalization Shortly Before He Began to Murder Me Special Guest Blogger Bernard Henri-Levy: I rise in defense of my very good friend Dominique Strauss-Kahn Note: Later events actually proved Dominique Strauss-Kahn completely innocent. The piece is still funny though -- if you pretend, for five minutes, that he was guilty. The Ace of Spades HQ Sex-for-Money Skankathon A D&D Guide to the Democratic Candidates Michael Moore Goes on Lunchtime Manhattan Death-Spree Artificial Insouciance: Maureen Dowd's Word Processor Revolts Against Her Numbing Imbecility The Dowd-O-Matic! The Donkey ("The Raven" parody) Archives
|