From AFP
Wednesday, November 18, 2009
I get screwed again!
Johnny Depp wins his 2nd 'Sexiest Man Alive' title
Seriously, People magazine?
You're telling me this:
Is sexier than THIS?
Obviously, the fix was in! Hey Depp, who'd you sleep with to win this one?
Eeeww! Never mind. You earned it.
Oh, this just keeps getting better!
According to super-reliable wingnut site "NewsMax" there is a possibility of a Palin/Beck ticket in 2012.
Palin/Beck?
No, even sillier!
It's no secret that former GOP vice-presidential candidate Sarah Palin and Fox News host Glenn Beck share great respect and admiration
Really?
So I guess you have to be as crazy as Glenn beck to admire Sarah Palin, or as dumb as Sarah Palin to respect Glenn Beck? Yeah, that adds up.
. . .so their fans can be forgiven for wondering: Is a "dream ticket" of Palin-Beck ticket completely out of the question?
No. No they can not be forgiven for wondering that. They can be pitied, they can be ridiculed, they can be shunned for considering Palin and Beck a "dream ticket," but not forgiven.
"I can envision a couple of different combinations, if ever I were to be in a position to really even seriously consider running for anything in the future, and I'm not there yet," Palin tells Newsmax. "But Glenn Beck I have great respect for. He's a hoot.
I'm sorry, a hoot? Did you really say he's a hoot? You have great respect for Glenn beck because he's a HOOT?
He's a hoot. He gets his message across in such a clever way.
I don't think you know what the word "clever" means.
Or the word "message."
Mouth-frothing, bug-eyed, baboon-ass crazy is really not a "clever" method of getting one's "message" across. And wild paranoid bouts of lunacy are not really "messages."
And he's so bold, I have to respect that.
maybe you have to, but the rest of us sure as hell don't.
He calls it like he sees it, and he's very, very, very effective."
I don't think you understand what the word "effective" means. Perhaps you meant to say Defective? Also, there's got to be a limit on how many "very's" you can string together in one sentence. I think the limit is probably one, I'd be willing to accept two, but three just means you couldn't come up with a better word.
So in summary, I guess I would just add: Please, God let this happen. A Palin/Beck ticket would be the political train-wreck of the century.
A Palin/Beck ticket would be the "Beyond the Valley of the Dolls." of Presidential politics.
Palin and Beck would be the Gary Busey and Nick Nolte of national campaigns.
A Palin/Beck ticket would be the political equivalent of OJ Simpson and Phil Spector being tried together for killing Micheal Jackson. With Paris Hilton as the prosecuting attorney.
Seriously, Palin and Beck would be to politics what BritneySpears and Lindsay Lohan are to Hollywood.
Palin and Beck would be the Amy Winehouse and Pete Doherty of the campaign trail.
I got a million of 'em!
Palin-Beck Ticket? Sarah Doesn't Rule it Out
Palin/Beck?No, even sillier!
It's no secret that former GOP vice-presidential candidate Sarah Palin and Fox News host Glenn Beck share great respect and admiration
Really?
So I guess you have to be as crazy as Glenn beck to admire Sarah Palin, or as dumb as Sarah Palin to respect Glenn Beck? Yeah, that adds up.
. . .so their fans can be forgiven for wondering: Is a "dream ticket" of Palin-Beck ticket completely out of the question?
No. No they can not be forgiven for wondering that. They can be pitied, they can be ridiculed, they can be shunned for considering Palin and Beck a "dream ticket," but not forgiven.
"I can envision a couple of different combinations, if ever I were to be in a position to really even seriously consider running for anything in the future, and I'm not there yet," Palin tells Newsmax. "But Glenn Beck I have great respect for. He's a hoot.
I'm sorry, a hoot? Did you really say he's a hoot? You have great respect for Glenn beck because he's a HOOT?
He's a hoot. He gets his message across in such a clever way.
I don't think you know what the word "clever" means.
Or the word "message."
Mouth-frothing, bug-eyed, baboon-ass crazy is really not a "clever" method of getting one's "message" across. And wild paranoid bouts of lunacy are not really "messages."
And he's so bold, I have to respect that.
maybe you have to, but the rest of us sure as hell don't.
He calls it like he sees it, and he's very, very, very effective."
I don't think you understand what the word "effective" means. Perhaps you meant to say Defective? Also, there's got to be a limit on how many "very's" you can string together in one sentence. I think the limit is probably one, I'd be willing to accept two, but three just means you couldn't come up with a better word.
So in summary, I guess I would just add: Please, God let this happen. A Palin/Beck ticket would be the political train-wreck of the century.
A Palin/Beck ticket would be the "Beyond the Valley of the Dolls." of Presidential politics.
Palin and Beck would be the Gary Busey and Nick Nolte of national campaigns.
A Palin/Beck ticket would be the political equivalent of OJ Simpson and Phil Spector being tried together for killing Micheal Jackson. With Paris Hilton as the prosecuting attorney.
Seriously, Palin and Beck would be to politics what BritneySpears and Lindsay Lohan are to Hollywood.
Palin and Beck would be the Amy Winehouse and Pete Doherty of the campaign trail.
I got a million of 'em!
Tuesday, November 17, 2009
The Latest Threat
When you get an e-mail with this as the subject line:
Join us to see the next religion to threatening Christianity
You gotta figure you're in for some good crazy.
If nothing else, the phrase "to threatening" promises some nuttiness.
And the first line of the actual e-mail?
Join us to see the next religion to threatening Christianity
So the writer apparently believes this is correct English!
Important free broadcast - Not Evil Just Wrong – Global Warming Science or Religion?
This Should be the shortest broadcast ever. "Science. Thank you, and good night."
Tim Wildmon and Crane Durham of AFA will be joined by Ann McElhinney and Phelim McAleer, the makers of the movie "Not Evil Just Wrong" along with other guests including members of Congress and business people as we discuss the Green Religion that is being scared upon us by the secular humanists.
Not involved in this discussion: anyone who knows what the fuck he's talking about.
So who are Ann McElhenney and Phelim McAleer? Here's what i turned up with a quick Yahoo search:
Laura Ingraham hosted Phelim McAleer and Ann McElhinney, Irish husband and wife documentarians, on their soon-to-be-released film, Not Evil Just Wrong.
Hmm, Laura Ingraham and atrocious syntax? This should be good.
McElhinney said that environmentalists seem to leave people out of the equation as with the number of children who have died thanks to the pesticides ban.
Also left out of the equation was the fact that there isn't actually a pesticide ban. Sure, DDT has been banned and I'm sure a few others have, but many many pesticides are still readily available. Just walk into any Home Depot and ask someone to point you to the pesticide aisle. So how is it that the imaginary ban has killed a bunch of children? They don't say, but I'm going to go ahead and assume that the answer is "it didn't."
McAleer said that environmentalism is anti-capitalism, anti-human, anti-American.
So clearly, they're taking a sober, objective look at the issue, and the obvious conclusion is that a movement which seeks to prevent Earth from becoming unlivable for the Human race is undoubtedly Anti-Human.
They said that banning CO2 will be as deadly as banning DDT.
Of course no one is considering banning CO2, since it would be impossible, like banning dirt. But don't let that get in the way of a good diatribe!
But back to the e-mail.
Get the facts and counter the myths. We have brought out the experts to arm you.
Oh, experts? You mean climatologists? Physicists? Scientists of some sort?
Yeah, not so much.
. . .guests including members of Congress and business people as we discuss the Green Religion. . .
None of whom remotely resemble "experts" in any field of science.
See why our leaders have embraced this movement to grab total control of our lives and use population control to satisfy there [sic] reckless desire for power.
Um, I'm sorry, our leaders are doing what now? I thought healthcare was their tool to seize total control of everything.
Global warming alarmists want Americans to believe that humans are killing the planet. But Not Evil Just Wrong, a new documentary by Phelim McAleer and Ann McElhinney, proves that the only threats to America (and the rest of the world) are the flawed science and sky-is-falling rhetoric of Al Gore and his allies in environmental extremism.
Yeah, someone needs to explain the difference between "proves" and "states emphatically" to these bozos.
Not Evil Just Wrong warns Americans that their jobs, modest lifestyles and dreams for their children are at stake. Small towns in the heartland, like Vevay, Ind., will become bastions of unemployment and poverty.
Which would be different from what we have now?
Breadwinners like Tim McElhany in Vevay will lose their jobs
Okay, what's the obsession with Vevay, Indiana?
Breadwinners like Tim McElhany in Vevay will lose their jobs -- and will have to start borrowing money again just to buy bread for their families.
And then Inspector Javert will pursue him across France! Oh Noes!
Not Evil Just Wrong exposes the deceptions that experts, politicians, educators and the media have been force-feeding the public for years.
They're all in on it!
Man-made pollution is not melting the polar icecaps. The ocean will not rise 20 feet in a flash. And the only polar bears dying because of man are the ones who try to eat men.
Monday, November 16, 2009
An Excerpt from "Going Rogue"
Here is an excerpt from Sarah Palin's upcoming book which she totally wrote all by herself!
I have to assume this conversation is heavily edited. I imagine the real conversation went something like this. . . . .
Sarah: I'm not a quitter, Track. That's why I have to quit.
Track: I'm going to pray for you, mom. I'm going to pray that someone teaches you the definition of the word "quit."
Sarah: Fast about it for a day.
Track: Hey, you're the one who's quitting a job she took an oath to complete, why the fuck should I be punished?
Sarah: Okay, forget fasting food. fast from cussing for a day then.
Track: How about I fast from having a normal person's name for the next, um, my whole fucking life? How would that be?
Sarah: I'm a maverick!
Track: Yeah, yeah, I know. You're a maverick, mom. How about you quit on this phone call halfway through?
And scene.
I can't imagine how someone hasn't taken sarah aside and told her to top telling the quitting story. Her agent, her publisher, her handlers, someone's gotta tell her that quitting to prove that your not a quitter doesn't really make you look all that smart. Or sane. Or not an idiot.
Also, how does her editor not do something about the phrase "fasting food?"
One can not fast food. The verb to fast doesn't work that way. It's what you call an intransitive verb. It doesn't take an object, except in the very unusual usage of making someone fast as in: to fast a patient for a day before surgery. (dictionary.com)
I think what she means to say is "refrain from," as in "refrain from cussing for a day." But at any rate, "fasting food" really makes no sense. At least "fast from cussing" sort of makes sense although it is incorrect, as Merriam Webster defines "fast" as: 1 : to abstain from food 2 : to eat sparingly or abstain from some foods.
Seriously, most of us learned this shit in high school.
I have to assume this conversation is heavily edited. I imagine the real conversation went something like this. . . . .
Sarah: I'm not a quitter, Track. That's why I have to quit.
Track: I'm going to pray for you, mom. I'm going to pray that someone teaches you the definition of the word "quit."
Sarah: Fast about it for a day.
Track: Hey, you're the one who's quitting a job she took an oath to complete, why the fuck should I be punished?
Sarah: Okay, forget fasting food. fast from cussing for a day then.
Track: How about I fast from having a normal person's name for the next, um, my whole fucking life? How would that be?
Sarah: I'm a maverick!
Track: Yeah, yeah, I know. You're a maverick, mom. How about you quit on this phone call halfway through?
And scene.
I can't imagine how someone hasn't taken sarah aside and told her to top telling the quitting story. Her agent, her publisher, her handlers, someone's gotta tell her that quitting to prove that your not a quitter doesn't really make you look all that smart. Or sane. Or not an idiot.
Also, how does her editor not do something about the phrase "fasting food?"
One can not fast food. The verb to fast doesn't work that way. It's what you call an intransitive verb. It doesn't take an object, except in the very unusual usage of making someone fast as in: to fast a patient for a day before surgery. (dictionary.com)
I think what she means to say is "refrain from," as in "refrain from cussing for a day." But at any rate, "fasting food" really makes no sense. At least "fast from cussing" sort of makes sense although it is incorrect, as Merriam Webster defines "fast" as: 1 : to abstain from food 2 : to eat sparingly or abstain from some foods.
Seriously, most of us learned this shit in high school.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)