The English are feeling the pinch in relation to recent terrorist threats and have raised their security level from "Miffed" to
"Peeved". Soon, though, security levels may be raised yet again to "Irritated" or even "A Bit Cross." The English have not been "A Bit Cross" since the blitz in 1940 when tea supplies all but ran out. Terrorists have been re-categorized from Tiresome" to a "Bloody Nuisance." The last time the British issued a Bloody Nuisance" level was in 1588 when threatened by the Spanish Armada.

The Scots raised their threat level from "Pissed Off" to "Let's get the Bastards" They don't have any other levels. This is the reason they have been used on the front line of the British army for the last 300 years.

The French government announced yesterday that it has raised its terror alert level from "Run" to "Hide". The only two higher levels in France are "Collaborate" and Surrender." The rise was precipitated by a recent fire that destroyed France 's white flag factory, effectively paralyzing the country's military capability.

It's not only the French who are on a heightened level of alert. Italy has increased the alert level from "Shout loudly and excitedly" to "Elaborate Military Posturing." Two more levels remain: "Ineffective Combat Operations" and "Change Sides."

Belgians, on the other hand, are all on holiday as usual, and the only threat they are worried about is NATO pulling out of Brussels

The Spanish are all excited to see their new submarines ready to deploy. These beautifully designed subs have glass bottoms so the new Spanish navy can get a really good look at the old Spanish navy.

And in the southern hemisphere...

New Zealand has also raised its security levels from "baaa" to "BAAAA". Due to continuing defense cutbacks (the airforce being a squadron of spotty teenagers flying paper aeroplanes and the navy some toy boats in the Prime Minister's bath), New Zealand only has one more level of escalation,which is "I hope Australia will come and rescue us".

Australia , meanwhile, has raised its security level from "No worries" to "She'll be al'right, mate". Three more escalation levels remain: "Crikey!', I think we'll need to cancel the barbie this weekend" and "The barbie is cancelled". So far no situation has ever warranted use of the final escalation level.

The Nooner just posted at noon!

The Nooner(tm) is back on at noon. Good. Now, how long will it take for AFKABibble to figure it out? He's going to have to catch the earlier bus to the library.

Finaly, a good one from nor.

-The Nooner just posted at noon!

And you were the most surprised.... roflmfao!

Rob_The_A_Hole

Status: exile (until March 28, 2010 at 12:24 AM)

I knew when I woke up this was going to be a nice day. So much for the, "new Rob", eh?

I think Rob was going after a suspension if you look at his posts.

"Yes, Officer. I meant to hit that tree."

"Yes, Officer. I meant to hit that tree."

"Loaded,...How'd you know there's a gun under the seat,....oh,...you were talking about me........

I knew when I woke up this was going to be a nice day.
#6 | Posted by Corky

So you flagged him, eh?

So you flagged him, eh?

I don't know if Rogers can tell or not, but I have a sneaking suspicion Rob may have flagged himself - AKA flaggerbation.

Wow looking through the deleted comments I think it's safe to say the Ray is freaking creepy.

But not as creepy as Ben Roethlisberger.

Poll for the nooner:

Which is worse: (a) killing dogs or (b) raping college girls?

I'm not saying either is excusable, I just want to see what people think.

But not as creepy as Ben Roethlisberger.

#13 | Posted by taxman

Talk about an idiot....

-So you flagged him, eh?

Naw, I missed those.

I did flag you the other day for calling GW, "my main squeeze".

Preventative Anti-Gag Flag.

b.

"Yes, Officer. I meant to hit that tree."

Yesterday, just down the road from my house someone put a Ferrari into a tree at a fairly good clip from what i saw.

"I'm not saying either is excusable, I just want to see what people think"

Planning out your weekend?

Why would you consider either one, Tax? Also, why would our votes sway you into making a decision?

Which is worse: (a) killing dogs or (b) raping college girls?

I'm not saying either is excusable, I just want to see what people think.

According to Reinsbutt and Spud republicans are guilty of both.

#14 | Posted by taxman at 2010-03-08 01:12 PM

WHAT?!

My niece had her child and there was much rejoicing.

What I didn't know if how hard it was to find a hospital for the delivery.

It's been a long time since I've was in her neighborhood.

The several hospitals I remember closed maternity wards and some, their ER's are closed.

Asking what is up, the number of hospitals closing themselves, or services such as maternity and ER.

There are now 3 hospitals in the city that will delivery a child. I, of course, was shocked.

But, for the current news, the baby needs to be checked for a medical procedure. Found out that the nearest hospital is on the other side of town - the closer ones don't do those procedures anymore.

So, in the end, with National Healthcare and increasing access to healthcare for all - who's going to provide the care?

BTW, the nurses in the hospitals, just last week, were told their hours may be cut further. Some my niece knows are already down to 16 hours a week.

Talk about an idiot....

I don't know if it is fair to call him a sexual predator just yet, but at the very least he has consistently made poor decisions. This latest one may cost him millions and his freedom.

I just want to see if there is as much anger focused at Roethlisberger as there was on Vick.

"So, in the end, with National Healthcare and increasing access to healthcare for all - who's going to provide the care?"

Details, details... Just pass the bill and we will worry about that later.

PT O'barnum

#1 good one
#14 Raping a human
Got a nasty trojan the other day. Came with a .mil from the National Intelligence Agency that North Korea had dropped a nuke on Taiwan and then it listed a whole bunch of agencies to prepare for immediate activation, including mine in the Ready Reserve. So I clicked on the link and it was for a weight loss product. Pissed me off.
Pax, mattm

" who's going to provide the care?"

Probably some ER doctors will be freed up.

Speaking of killing dogs, no one told me one year old children will harass old dogs to near death. I feel so bad dog - he's 11 years. Of course a one-year old doesn't know any better, and I tell him "no" and show him how to "pet", but again, he is only a year. The dog is a good sport and never once has growled - his main line of defense is licking the boy or simply walking away.

"raping college girls?"

Is raping college girls worse than just raping girls who may not be in college?

"got a nasty trojan the other day. Came with a .mil from the National Intelligence Agency that North Korea had dropped a nuke on Taiwan and then it listed a whole bunch of agencies to prepare for immediate activation, including mine in the Ready Reserve. So I clicked on the link and it was for a weight loss product. Pissed me off."

Hmmm, makes me really confident if the real thing had occured. Nukes dropped on USA-- Immediate USA response denied because of email worm.

"Which is worse: (a) killing dogs or (b) raping college girls?"

how about "raping and killing college girls who are dogs"?

"how about "raping and killing college girls who are dogs"?"

Who brought Glenn Beck into this???

Are you eating the dogs and the girls?

how about "raping and killing college girls who are dogs"?

#32 | Posted by NerfHerder

Falls under "Public Service."

Did I really just type that?

Is raping college girls worse than just raping girls who may not be in college?

Cougars give it away. Joking Danni, I am directing the comment at Roethlisberger who seems to target younger women. All forms of rape are heinous.

Is raping college girls worse than just raping girls who may not be in college?

Why wouldn't it be?

College girls are more likely to go on to higher paying jobs---and less likely to have a large number of children.

In short, they are far more likely to become net contributors to the Social Contract than drains upon it.

So, it is in the best interest of the common good that college girls not be subjected to a traumatic event that would otherwise interrupt their function as net contributors---whereas non-college girls would already be entrenched in the state entitlement system where the consequences of a rape would have less impact.

~~Sincerely,

"Progressive" Public Policy Mao

Are you eating the dogs and the girls?

mmMMMmmm..,,,

I just want to see if there is as much anger focused at Roethlisberger as there was on Vick.
#25 | Posted by taxman

If folks here are anything like a certain retorter who claimed that girls ask for it, my guess is no.

You are a sick motherfucker, Mao. Hiding that obvious fact under your attempt at constructing opponents of straw doesn't even begin to hide that glaring reality.

"College girls are more likely to go on to higher paying jobs"

Yeah, like Nerfherder's high-class call girls

When the "I'm rich" pick-up line doesn't work, try "my dad's rich"

re: College girls are more likely to go on to higher paying jobs---and less likely to have a large number of children....

..and less likely to make the mistake of fucking a creep like you.

college girls are good on friday nights, but townie girls are even better early saturday mornings...

Now go take a pain pill, Boyd.

College girls, being more intelligent, would be more apt to just lie back and enjoy it.

re: Its exactly the context in which the despicable sacks of shit for whom you cheerlead view human beings.

#44 | Posted by Jak_Se_Mao at 2010-03-08 01:39 PM | Reply | Flag:

Such as the "despicable sack[s] of shit" who said this?

So, it is in the best interest of the common good that college girls not be subjected to a traumatic event that would otherwise interrupt their function as net contributors---whereas non-college girls would already be entrenched in the state entitlement system where the consequences of a rape would have less impact.

I fail to see where anyone but you pulled that out of your ass, though it's not too late to shove it back in there where it belongs.

Mao-
re: Except its not a "strawman", you sanctimonious little asshole.

Quote anyone but you saying anything even remotely like that.

Are you eating the dogs and the girls?

#34 | Posted by STIRSUMUP

With some fava beans and a nice chianti.

Here's your statement, which you not only typed, but posted:

College girls are more likely to go on to higher paying jobs---and less likely to have a large number of children.

In short, they are far more likely to become net contributors to the Social Contract than drains upon it.

So, it is in the best interest of the common good that college girls not be subjected to a traumatic event that would otherwise interrupt their function as net contributors---whereas non-college girls would already be entrenched in the state entitlement system where the consequences of a rape would have less impact.

~~Sincerely,

"Progressive" Public Policy Mao

#37 | Posted by Jak_Se_Mao at 2010-03-08 01:33 PM | Reply | Flag:

Now, where did any of your phantom "progressives" say anything like that?

Boyd,

Do you not recognize satire when you see it?

Quote anyone but you saying anything even remotely like that.

Go into the archives and re-visit any thread documenting a family having 10+ children - you'll find plenty in there that is remotely like that.

Do you not recognize satire when you see it?

#53 | Posted by JeffJ

Fucking Ray Charles would have a better chance seeing it.

Jeff-
I recognize an an asshole who projects his own pathological misogyny onto his fantasy opponents, yes.

Satire requires skill beyond that.

Now, where did any of your phantom "progressives" say anything like that?

Do you know who Pete Singer is, dipshit?

Have you read the health care bill?

Are you so fucking incapable of independent, abstract reasoning that you use a map to get to work every morning?

re: Go into the archives and re-visit any thread documenting a family having 10+ children - you'll find plenty in there that is remotely like that.

#54 | Posted by JeffJ at 2010-03-08 01:55 PM | Reply | Flag

Why don't you find this for me as expressed by anyone but Mao or expressed in the ravings of Glenn Beck in the "progressive" world:

College girls are more likely to go on to higher paying jobs---and less likely to have a large number of children.

In short, they are far more likely to become net contributors to the Social Contract than drains upon it.

So, it is in the best interest of the common good that college girls not be subjected to a traumatic event that would otherwise interrupt their function as net contributors---whereas non-college girls would already be entrenched in the state entitlement system where the consequences of a rape would have less impact.

~~Sincerely,

"Progressive" Public Policy Mao

#37 | Posted by Jak_Se_Mao at 2010-03-08 01:33 PM | Reply | Flag:

Richard Ely, Boyd?

John Dewey?

Eugenics?

"Progressives"?

Has this become the "Retort Repost?" We read it the first time Bet. We read it the second. Now, you are spamming.

Do you know who Pete Singer is, dipshit?

Have you read the health care bill?

Are you so fucking incapable of independent, abstract reasoning that you use a map to get to work every morning?

#57 | Posted by Jak_Se_Mao at 2010-03-08 01:57 PM | Reply | Flag:

A quote from Pete Singer or a snippet from the health care bill would be cool, or you could just rant some more.

Got any kind of rebuttal, Boyd?

Richard Ely, Boyd?

John Dewey?

Eugenics?

"Progressives"?

#59 | Posted by Jak_Se_Mao at 2010-03-08 02:01 PM | Reply | Flag:

Has this become the "Retort Repost?" We read it the first time Bet. We read it the second. Now, you are spamming.

#60 | Posted by kanrei at 2010-03-08 02:01 PM | Reply | Flag:

Thanks, Kanrei. I wouldn't want to be spamming, or off on a rant about how the progressives want to kill you.

Got any kind of rebuttal, Boyd?

#62 | Posted by Jak_Se_Mao at 2010-03-08 02:02 PM | Reply | Flag:

Um, rebut what? You haven't posted anything but nonsense and random names.

#58 | Posted by BetelG

On the last thread about a couple having 16 kids, the invective was flying, even to the point of it being called a crime against humanity.

You are fucking stupid if you think he was actually advocating the rape of anyone.

He was taking what he sees as an anti-procreation stance of the left and taking the logic contained therein to an absurd exaggeration extreme in order to make a point:

The point I took away in his mockery is that it's leftism that would place a higher value on one type of woman (college-educated) over another (no college) due to the fact that college-women procreate less than non-college women.

Are you that hyper-sensitve and dense that you don't see that; or does your abject hatred for all things Mao preclude you from viewing anything he says in any manner that doesn't fit your personal prejudices?

I wouldn't want to be spamming, or off on a rant about how the progressives want to kill you.

Or, G-d forbid, actually make sense. WTF does that even mean? "How the progressives want to kill you?" Medication will help.

This has been very enjoyable, but I think I'll just go watch some other predictable display of nonsense instead.

Adios blog

"Medication will help"

Doubtful. Can't cure stupid. It's barely treatable even with shock therapy.

Boyd,

If you want to get outraged, check out this thread:

You think he's crying again, Jeff?

If not, he's getting pretty close.

He's not there yet, but it looks as if he's leaving before the flow.

"You think he's crying again, Jeff?"

It's funny how every time the trustfund rancher gets into it with Boyd, his little cheerleader Jeffj shows up.

Um, rebut what?

Rebut the examples of "Progressives" who base the worth of a human being's life upon its ability to serve the common interests of the state.

Jeff-
re: The point I took away in his mockery is that it's leftism that would place a higher value on one type of woman (college-educated) over another (no college) due to the fact that college-women procreate less than non-college women.

Yeah, I got that. I just didn't see any evidence to back up his ridiculous assertion that "leftism" places less of a value on "non-college women" than "rightism" does. Mao just pulled that out of his ass, and you rolled in it.

Really got to go.

On second thought, Jeff, I'd like to flesh this out a bit. You stated that, "the point I took away in his mockery is that it's leftism that would place a higher value on one type of woman (college-educated) over another (no college) due to the fact that college-women procreate less than non-college women."

1. Why is it that women with more education have fewer children?

2. Why is it that "progressives" have historically, and presently, advocated for the education of women and womens right to vote over the objections of conservatives?

3. Why do you conflate, as Mao facetiously does, the progressive advocacy of education of women with the curious leap of thinking that progressives therefore devalue women with less education?

4. Why does your stance regarding womens rights to increased educational opportunities and access to reproductive rights and reproductive information more closely approximate the position of the Taliban?

Just some food for thought, Jeff. Think about those questions and maybe consider that defending the odd sociopathic projections of Mao may not be the best course for you to take, even though you have deep antipathy toward me personally, for whatever reason.

I look forward to your response, but if I don't leave now I'll be late for work. I'll check back later, maybe.

we both end up with an unsolicited rim job from some geriatric pot-head fuck with exactly three words in his quiver of insults.

#76 | Posted by Jak_Se_Mao

Hahahaha. You ought to smoke some cannabis yourself, Jacque. Maybe it would wipe that snarl off your face.

On the other hand, you're in Texas, where the "manly" drug of choice is alcohol. And besides, I hear the punishment for cannabis use in Texas is being chained to a truck and dragged down a road. Better stick to the booze, lush.

"I hear the punishment for cannabis use in Texas is being chained to a truck and dragged down a road. "

Unless your name is Willie.

"Unless your name is Willie."

Here you go, Zat.

I'll Never Smoke Weed With Willie Again

Come on Nulli, that was in North Carolina. Those people make Texans look like they're from San Francisco.

These pantspissing morons only know what Glen Beck tells them.
Posted by axe at 2010-03-08 11:47 AM

Chances are you don't even know what a "progressive" is, beyond what Glenn Beck tells you to think.
Posted by Doc_Sarvis at 2010-03-08 06:27 AM

Why don't you find this for me as expressed by anyone but Mao or expressed in the ravings of Glenn Beck in the "progressive" world.
Posted by BetelG at 2010-03-08 01:59 PM

Who brought Glenn Beck into this???
Posted by danni at 2010-03-08 01:29 PM

As soon as the nice library lady finishes changing his Depends, the Babbler will be along to parrot some nonsence from Glen Beck about how unions were the reason of September 11, 2001 or some other insane bullshit.
Posted by axe at 2010-03-08 02:39 PM

Flag: Obsessed

Dan Rather saying " Obama is so incompetent that he couldn't sell watermellons"

Not what he said and your use of quotation marks makes you a liar misquoting him. What he said was:

"Listen he's a nice person, he's very articulate" this is what's been used against him, "but he couldn't sell watermelons if it, you gave him the state troopers to flag down the traffic."

Dan is incorrectly assuming what those opposed to Obama would be saying, not what Rather himself thinks. It is the use of the "watermelon" analogy that is the problem to me and the silence of outrage about it. Had it been Beck or Limbaugh saying the exact same thing word for word, the noise would be deafening calling for their heads.

Wonder why? I don't ...the liberals take care of their own..which shows all the rest was political and the press biased.

how much is Rather "one of their own" anymore?

what is his status? Is he on satellite?

re: Had it been Beck or Limbaugh saying the exact same thing word for word, the noise would be deafening calling for their heads.

#87 | Posted by kanrei at 2010-03-08 03:56 PM | Reply | Flag:

You mean like when Glenn Beck said that Obama had a "deep seated hatred of white people" and "white culture", and was a "racist", and when Limbaugh repeatedly referred to Obama as the "affirmative action president"?

Your comments then were like they are now?

No?

Wait. I think I get it. When Beck or Limbaugh make foolish statements you either defend them or avoid comment and quietly seethe waiting for when you can have a blog moment such as this.

Is that about right?

pffft. Going out for a smoke and a then I'm done with this.

Wait. I think I get it.

first time for everything.

wait......no, guess not.

Boyd,

Hold off for a bit - I just answered all of your questions above and the whole fricking post deleted. I am going to re-type it now.

1. Why is it that women with more education have fewer children?

Generalizing - they tend to start having families later as they usually start a career first. Once they start a family, having fewer children is a better balance between family and work.

2. Why is it that "progressives" have historically, and presently, advocated for the education of women and womens right to vote over the objections of conservatives?

I'll give you 'historically', but presently? No. Current-day conservatives advocate for the education of women and their right to vote every bit as much as progressives.

3. Why do you conflate, as Mao facetiously does, the progressive advocacy of education of women with the curious leap of thinking that progressives therefore devalue women with less education?

First off, I didn't fully agree with Mao - I was just pointing out that you seemed to miss his point. Secondly (generalizing again), progressives tend to get a bit pissy when couples choose to have more than, say, 3 children. Since less-educated women tend to procreate more than more-educated women, his point wasn't that much of a stretch. You have to remember, it was Danni's comment that provided the segue - he took the context of her comment as a means of bashing 'unacceptable' levels of procreation, and by proxy, made the point that progressives would place more value on college educated women than those lacking a college education. What I find so ironic about the progressive stance on procreation is that modest (at least) population growth is critical in order to maintain and fund the statist Ponzi scheme known as progressivism.

4. Why does your stance regarding womens rights to increased educational opportunities and access to reproductive rights and reproductive information more closely approximate the position of the Taliban?

I think men and women should have equal educational opporunities (read that sentence very carefully). Hell, my wife has the same level of education as I. As for abortion, I am pro-choice, albeit barely. I am fully against any form of federal funding for abortion. If the states want to do it on a state-by state-basis, I am OK with that. I would like to see our society as a whole shun abortion as a choice a bit more. I would like to see our society be more supportive and encouraging of women who choose life. I would like to see restrictions on abortion tightened a little bit - maybe make 20 weeks be the cutoff and also require a woman seeking an abortion to come in and watch a short video that presents a (1-sided) view against abortion and then having to wait 24-hours before having the procedure. The video would contain a couple of testimonials from women who:
A. Aborted and then later regretted it.
B. Aborted and had medical complications (with full disclosure as to the percentage likelihood of this happening).
C. The joy that couples have had with adopting unwanted babies/children.

Such restrictions are less difficult than current gun-liscensing restrictions and that is a right that is CLEARLY enumerated in the Constitution.

Anyhow, thank you for the thought-provoking questions.

"and also require a woman seeking an abortion to come in and watch a short video that presents a (1-sided) view against abortion and then having to wait 24-hours before having the procedure."

Would you also require men to watch a video on parenting and the costs, and then wait 24 hours before having sex?

Would you also require men to watch a video on parenting and the costs, and then wait 24 hours before having sex?

Apples and oranges - however we are way too cavalier about sex these days.

parenting and the costs,

It needs to be taken far more seriously, I'll give you that.

Would you also require men to watch a video on parenting and the costs, and then wait 24 hours before having sex?

If you think intercourse is analogous to an abortion, I feel sorry for you.

I don't. His analogies are retarded.

#84 | Posted by JOE

Sad but true.

Sean Penn speaks out strongly against the 1st Amendment....and further says opponents of Hugo Chavez to.... "You know, do I hope that those people die screaming of rectal cancer? Yeah"

Shhhhhh, keep it quiet:

"Dan Rather: 'Articulate' Obama Couldn't Even 'Sell Watermelons'"

Dan Rather talks about Obama with those white folks at MSNBC:

Dan RATHER: "...he's a nice person...he's very articulate...but he couldn't sell watermelons if it, you gave him the state troopers to flag down the traffic."

MATTHEWS: "Okay"

"The end of the road for Barack Obama?"

"Barack Obama seems unable to face up to America's problems, writes Simon Heffer in New York."

MASSA ON BACK TOMorrow...5 est

Palin loves socialist commie medicine from canukistan:

WASHINGTONSarah Palin's weekend admission that her family travelled to Canada to receive treatment under the public health-care system she's so often demonized prompted skepticism and ridicule Monday among her critics in the United States.

"My first five years of life we spent in Skagway, Alaska, right there by Whitehorse," the former Alaska governor said Saturday night during a speech in Calgary.

"Believe it or not this was in the 60s we used to hustle on over the border for health care that we would receive in Whitehorse. I remember my brother, he burned his ankle in some little kid accident thing, and my parents had to put him on a train and rush him over to Whitehorse and I think, isn't that kind of ironic now. Zooming over the border, getting health care from Canada."

#105...

1960's? She was born in 1964. Seems like you and those critics are awful desperate to try and find fault.

Jeff J-
Woah...sorry I missed this:

re: Current-day conservatives advocate for the education of women and their right to vote every bit as much as progressives.

I hear ya'll are much more accepting of minorities and gays too! (since you lost those battles as well). Too bad that doesn't apply to conservatism in general or globally, but rather only to conservatives who've had their retrograde asses handed to them in liberal western democracies.

Damn, used up all me links fer the day already.

Here's a fun one.

The state of Florida is considering a new tax incentive bill to draw film production to the state, and a provision in the bill would allow denial of tax breaks to films that feature non-traditional family values.' What does that phrase mean, exactly? No one knows.

As the Palm Beach Post reports, the $75m bill is a priority for the state's Republican majority in the House, and has already passed through one committee with unanimous approval. The House Finance and Tax Council, is next. If approved, the state's allowance for a 2% tax break for family-friendly' films would become a 5% break, and films could be disallowed on the basis of a very vague language.