« Chris Baldwin may be a conservative crackpot, but he knew my "Tiger Woods undefeated in 2008" prediction was pure goldNew England Patriots fans petition to have Super Bowl, Wolfrum Whammy reversed »

53 comments

Comment from: Ron Mon [Member] Email
Ummm, it's Fox News. They aren't exactly progressive. They really aren't.
02/20/08 @ 17:08
Comment from: patricia [Visitor] Email
The likes of Bill O'Reily, and his narrow-minded followers, are why it's so important that we elect Barack Obama...but then you know that :)]
02/20/08 @ 17:10
Comment from: Judge Smails [Visitor] Email
Wolfie,

Your leftist idiot stripes are showing again. While I've never been an apologist for O'Reilly (I disagree with him a good percentage of the time), you took the comments about the Harlem restaurant out of context, and that's bad journalism. He was addressing the impression many people have of Harlem and was trying to disabuse people of such notions (although its reputation is, in general, warranted).

As for the lynching comment, it wasn't a slip of the tongue because it wasn't wrong. Bush is a PC idiot, like you; O'Reilly was just saying that he was going to be fair to her. Would it have made you feel better if he would have used the word "crucified"? Well, if so, did you ever think that it could be offensive to Christians?

No, that never would occur to your little leftist brain.

By the way, anyone who supports Obama is a blasted idiot.
02/20/08 @ 17:38
Comment from: William K. Wolfrum [Member] Email
Judge,

Your comment here is a good example why I never really bother replying to you. Because for someone who seems smart, and who obviously prides himself on some amount of intelligence, you add absolutely nothing to any discussion other than an endless array of logical fallacies and insults.

Just in your latest comment alone, you've used several ad-homs, built a strawman that you boldly knocked down, used a false dichotomy, etc. There's very likely more, but I'm no expert. All I know is that all of your responses follow these lines. And while you may think "logical fallacies" is fancy liberal talk, it actually does matter when trying to debate a subject. But you don't debate, you just make an endless array of unsubstantiated claims while hurling insults. While Michael Savage fans may find this to be brilliant, general society and history finds it to be stupid and I would imagine that golf fans generally agree.

Basically, Judge, you are part of a long line of folks who scream "The world is ending. And it's all your fault, you jerks." So while it's nice to have you as a commentator, don't start thinking you're some original spokesman. You're a mimic. And you choose to mimic ignorants.

That all said, here's a question: Why would someone like O'Reilly, or Glenn Beck, or Savage care about being called a racist? Why wouldn't they embrace it? It's just a word. If you legitimately believe that different races are inferior than others, than you (I use "you" in the collective sense) are a racist. Why are so many obvious racists so cowed by political correctness. I mean, being a racist is heinous, of course, but being a cowardly one seems much worse.

Bill
02/20/08 @ 18:07
Comment from: Mary from Manhattan [Visitor]
About a week or two ago, Julie Bandares on Fox's "Red Eye" show referred to Senator Obama a "Halfrican", so I am not suprised that others on Fox News and Fox Radio would continue their racist comments. Absolutely nothing will become of it. Roger Ailes lets them do whatever they want, as long as its against Democrats.

What do you think Bill O'Reilly would say about MSNBC if Keith Olberman used the term "lynching"?
02/20/08 @ 19:51
Comment from: Alex [Visitor] Email
Once again the lefties on these blogs have proven that ANYTHING can be made into a political controversy.

To paraphrase the immortal Vince Lombardi, to liberals "politics isn't everything, it's the ONLY thing."

Mary,

I don't think O'Reilly cares one whit what Olbermann says or thinks. Not many people do .

Olbermann's ratings are lower than a snakes belly

Alex USMC 1969-73
02/20/08 @ 20:26
Comment from: Duras [Visitor]
cross=noose

http://www.pbs.org/moyers/journal/11232007/watch.html
02/20/08 @ 21:30
Comment from: obmud [Visitor]
I'm sure Barack and Michelle knew O'Reilly's type of venom would come around eventually. It shows how primitive the minds of these scum still are. I notice there are a few of them lurking around this site; "kill them all and let God sort them out types". Yuk....they should all be in hell!
02/20/08 @ 23:10
Comment from: Fox Fallacy Finder [Visitor] Email
Alex and "Judge" -> typical ignorant zealots who use name calling rather than facts/reason. You should listen to President Bush's own condemnation just 10 days ago of the shame involved in using even the term lynching.

Bill O'Reilly is such an ignorant racist he can't even remember that lesson for 10 days.

Calling for a lynching if there are words in a non-scripted statement that he finds offensive is absolutely NO proof "that ANYTHING can be made into a political controversy."

Your comments are simply proof that your low-grade mentality is an embarrassment to the American culture and people.

Ignorance shouldn't be paraded around via your childish name-calling backed by stupidity.
02/21/08 @ 01:55
Comment from: Bob Marshall [Visitor] Email
Uhhh... I think you mean "the issue was exacerbated" not "exasperated."

For that matter, issues aren't really exacerbated, situations and errors are.
02/21/08 @ 03:35
Comment from: JW [Visitor]
The word you were looking for was "exacerbate", meaning 'make worse', not "exasperate", which means 'irritate', in paragraph 2.
02/21/08 @ 08:43
Comment from: Alex [Visitor] Email
WkW, Foxy, Mary, et al,

O'Reilly specifically said that he DID NOT want to be part of a lynching party for MS. Obama

Yet you lefties view him as a virulent racist because he merely uttered the word "lynch."

Would you people have the word "lynch" banned from any future prose and expunged from any past prose? Should the word "lynch" be proscibed from any future discourse? Should its use become some sort of a hate crime?

You lefties have a real double standard here. When Clarence Thomas is repeatedly refered to as an "uncle Tom", or Condaleeza Rice is tagged as "Aunt Jemima", there is nary a peep heard from the left side of the aisle. When Spike Lee says that conservatives, especially black conservatives, should be taken out and beaten with a Louisville slugger, the liberals say there is nothing threatening about such speech. Apparently you birds don't know that a person beaten with a baseball bat usually gets a one-way trip to a morgue.

But the attitude to such vitriol is "nothing to see here, folks, keep moving no racism here."

Your double standard reaches its zenith when you idolize that icon of the liberal left, Robert "Sheets" Byrd. When he casually referred to some of his scruffier constituents as "white n--g--rs," he was defended vigoursly by his numerous admirers. Ol' Sheets was just following the speech patterns he had picked up while living in the hardscrabble hills of West Virginia. Again, nothing racist there.

As for Sheets being the Grand Dragon (or was it the Imperial Wizard?) of the Ku Klux Klan, why , a lot of his best friends were also Klansmen. Just a lot of good ole boys having a little fun.

Hypocrisy, thy name is liberalism.

Alex USMC 1969-73
02/21/08 @ 08:53
Comment from: conservative [Visitor] Email
Alex wrote: "O'Reilly specifically said that he DID NOT want to be part of a lynching party for MS. Obama"

It's very convenient Alex, that you overlooked the fact that what he ACTUALLY SAID was:

“I don’t want to go on a lynching party against Michelle Obama unless there’s evidence, hard facts, that say this is how the woman really feels.”

Did you catch the word UNLESS there? Or did you just gloss right over that because it's inconvenient to the argument you made in your last comment?

I'm as conservative as they come and I'm embarassed that O'Reilly dares to lump himself into that same category. Same with you, Alex. Please don't come to the defense of conservatives when it's clear you don't even know how the hell to read.

02/21/08 @ 09:37
Comment from: Alex [Visitor] Email
consevative,

I don't like referring to you by that name, since you are about as much of a conservative as I am a Nepalese astronaut.

If YOU knew how to read AND digest what you've read, you'd realize that the words of O'Reilly were but a fraction of my thread.

Please don't try to pass yourself off as conservative. You can't even try to disguise you liberalism.

Come on, show me your defense for "Sheets" Byrd" and Spike Lee.

As far as my ability to read is a subject for this blog goes, I have more comprehension than a left-wing kook like you will ever have.

Alex USMC 1969-73
02/21/08 @ 10:01
Comment from: Alex [Visitor] Email
WKW,

It seems like you've attracted some seminar bloggers and networkers.

That's what happens when you inject left-wing politics into a golf board.

But I think you knew that already.

If that was your intention, you've succeeded.

Alex USMC 1969-73
02/21/08 @ 10:49
Comment from: Judge Smails [Visitor] Email
Alex,

Yes, "conservative" does seem like a seminar blogger -- I know exactly what you mean.

You made some great points about liberal hypocrisy, but don't expect the lefties to address them substantively. The won't do it because they can't. Liberalism is an emotion-based ideology; logic has nothing to do with it.
02/21/08 @ 13:12
Comment from: Judge Smails [Visitor] Email
Wolfie,

I'm glad you didn't really bother replying to me. However, it's quite obvious that when you don't respond to me, it's because you can't. And, in reality, your response here was sort of a non-response. You spoke of a "logical fallacy" but could provide no example.

You seem like the kind of fellow who kicks his ball out of a bad lie when his opponents aren't looking.
02/21/08 @ 13:18
Comment from: Joe Cool [Visitor] Email
Wolf Rum...how long have you been a member of the American Communist Party?
02/21/08 @ 19:22
Comment from: putt4par [Visitor] Email
A comment to sum up the whole argument about Tilghman.

There are laws in place to protect against racism. Too bad those laws weren't applied with equal zealousness on the likes of Sharpton, Jackson and a whole raft of "African-American" rappers whose statements and lyrics are rife with racist bigotry. Maybe also fine the Music and entertainment industry for allowing those same racial slurs to be published.
Until those laws are applied equally, there will be racist angst in america.
Oh yeah, maybe rein in Oprah and her sly racist innuendos which are just as hurtful as any lynching remarks made by Ms. Tilghman.
02/21/08 @ 21:36
Comment from: Judge Smails [Visitor] Email
putt4par,

I certainly agree with you on the double standard; however, you've made a grave mistake. There are no "laws" against "racism" in America (i.e., hate-speech laws); what the black racial hustlers and rappers you mentioned say is vile but not illegal, nor should it be.

What lynched people such as Tilghman and Imus were not laws but misbegotten social codes, which, to echo your sentiments, are certainly not applied equally.

Nevertheless, to accept the notion of hate-speech laws is to accept tyranny, for then those with clout will be able to determine what constitutes "hate," thereby stifling commentary they dislike.
02/22/08 @ 10:24
Comment from: Gemma [Visitor] Email
The society is going down the wrong path because people feel the need to take extreme stand in order to get heard or to make their point. You are either WITH ME or AGAINST ME. If you are not conservative, you are automatically a leftist commie of the nth degree; if you are not liberal, you must be a racist bigot who marry your own sister....

There's place for moderates, they are not being tolerated by either the left- or right-leaning.

Meanwhile, sadly, the rest of the world is laughing at you, not with you.
02/22/08 @ 16:49
Comment from: Judge Smails [Visitor] Email
Gemma,

I don't know who you're addressing, but I'm not a conservative. I'm a radical.
02/22/08 @ 17:09
Comment from: putt4par [Visitor] Email
I'd say that makes two of us, Judge.

More of a radical free thinker than a sheep following the bleeting rabble.

Never did care for mutton anyway.
02/22/08 @ 19:25
Comment from: A passing reader [Visitor] Email
Bill O’Reilly – Michelle Obama lynch comment 2.20.08
Scott Hamilton – Lynch on cover of Golf Mag 1.18.08
Rush Limbaugh – Condi Rice lynch comment 1.12.08
Kelly Tilghman – Tiger Woods lynch comment 1.11.08
Jena 6 – Civil Rights Protest in Louisiana 9.20.07
Bill O’Reilly – Harlem Restaurant comment 9.19.07
Don Imus – Rutgers Basketball comment 4.5.07


Facts
1. Bill O'Reilly's Sept comment was made a day before the Jena 6 Civil Rights Protest in Louisiana.
2. Both Bill O'Reilley's comments were made on his radio talk show rather than over broadcast media on tv.
3. All Bill O'Reilly's defenses were made via broadcast tv

I'm a strong supporter of Barack Obama and I believe that the mood within the US is one for a Democratic President. If Obama does win the nomination and Precidency, with regards to racism in this country, I believe that people like Ann Coulter, Rush Limbaugh, and Bill O'Reilly will fan the flames of racist rhetoric not seen since the 60s.

Free speech isn't free, it comes with a price. Defamation of character is one such price, Fox News makes no distinguishment between peaceful free speech and contentious free speech, they don't care, it's free speech just like single gun owner ship and arsenal stock piles are no different. I think that kind of blatant disregard for the concern of others is what makes republicans so right wing, they're too ideological and not realistic.

I hope, that within 40-50 years the Republican Party will be dead. Their representation excludes women and minorities but includes the old guard. If Islam is still the in middle ages, Conservative Republicans are still Antebellum America...
02/23/08 @ 07:39
Comment from: A passing reader-- [Visitor] Email
Post Script - On a second note, the type of free speech that Fox News hails really keeps the wounds from the Civil War to the Civil Rights Movement open, they just don't want to let it heal. The type of speech that Fox News puts out is the type of media that people in Louisiana feed off of. That's why you have Jena 6 and the continuation of a black white divide.

I don't believe that you can defend Fox News or Conservative Republicans for this type of wedge issue without wholly declaring that you hold some type of discrimination yourself because again, this is the modern age. If defamation of character can be launched against a company, that's the price Fox News should pay because their speech is aimed at an entire peoples.

02/23/08 @ 08:15
Comment from: Judge Smails [Visitor] Email
A passing reader,

You are obviously such a Kool-Aid drinker and so brain dead that addressing your folderol would be an exercise in futility and masochism.

Oh, I'm not so sure about the Republican Party, but quite likely is that within 40-50 years you'll be dead.
02/23/08 @ 10:27
Comment from: Kristen [Visitor] Email
O'Reilly is a ratings whore. He saw the kind of attention the Tilghman/Golfweek situation received and decided to display his racism using a recent watch-word and escalate it to the political realm.
02/23/08 @ 11:46
Comment from: Kiel Christianson [Visitor] Email
Wow. I surely don't want to call Old Fake Name and Jarhead
hot-headed, race-baiting, name-calling, know-nothings.
I would never think of doing such a thing.
02/23/08 @ 13:45
Comment from: putt4par [Visitor] Email
Of course you wouldn't.
I'm just surprised that the leatherneck Bonehead hasn't pitched his piece here yet.
02/23/08 @ 15:11
Comment from: William K. Wolfrum [Member] Email
"I'm not a conservative. I'm a radical."

That's interesting. I wonder if the Islamic radicals who you so fear spend as much of their time dissecting Michelle Wie's game on a golf Web site?

Bill

02/24/08 @ 01:08
Comment from: Judge Smails [Visitor] Email
Wolfie,

It's so nice of you to not respond to me again. Not surprisingly, you have no idea what the word "radical" really denotes and don't realize that not all radicals are the same. But I'll give you a hint: It's much like proclaiming yourself to be an iconoclast.

Oh, Wolfie, I don't fear the Islamic nuts; I combat them. You will fear them . . . in good time.
02/24/08 @ 11:02
Comment from: putt4par [Visitor] Email
Judge Smails said: "...You will fear them . . . in good time."

I believe it's very close, Judge.

Anyone seriously considering Obama as president of the United States should be very sure of what they want.

Here is a man one step removed from an Islamic background.
Here is a man who won't pledge allegiance to his flag because he doesn't want to appear to chose sides.

What will happen if he is elected president? Leader of the armed forces! and he can't appear to chose sides?
Will he pledge allegiance to the flag and place his hand on the bible, swearing to be fatihful to the Tenets and beliefs of the United States of America?
And he is in serious position to be your next president..

Wolfie, you have a lot more to fear from your liberal views than anything we may say on your silly little blog.

You wonder why a Canadian is worried?
Because anything you liberal idiots do in the US of A bleeds over into Canada, affecting us directly, and usually to our detriment
02/24/08 @ 12:59
Comment from: Judge Smails [Visitor] Email
putt4par,

I agree with you -- it's closer than many think. Yet there are many threats to Western civilization, first and foremost among them the fact that we're allowing ourselves to be invaded by unassimilable foreigners.

What you say about the US is true, in that we are -- and I mean this neither as a compliment or a pejorative -- the world's current hegemon. Thus, if we sneeze, everyone else often gets a cold.

Having said this, the rest of the West does a good job descending into PC tyranny itself. For instance, in Canada, you have the euphemistically-named "Human Rights Commissions," which serve to stifle politically-incorrect dissent. They have, for instance, criminally punished Christians who criticized Islam and homosexual behavior.

Don't take this as as put-down of Canada, as this is something that bedevils all of the West, and we have the same leftist scum here. Moreover, I truly wish that Canada, Australia, England or New Zealand didn't fit into this category, because then I'd have a place to go. As it stands right now, it's just a matter of picking your leftist poison.
02/25/08 @ 11:31
Comment from: putt4par [Visitor] Email
Unfortunately for those countries that you mentioned, including Canada, that is the sad truth.

What I am sick of is the White-Apologists who seem to think that bending over for all the special interest and religious, groups will change the world into a better place.

I only wish that it were so. Alas we have the examples of Kosovo,Bosnia, Kenya, Iraq,and all the other places where the "religion of peace" holds sway.
If that is the way that our "fifth estate" wishes to live, then let them move there.
In the mean time, let them report the news instead of becoming the news with assinine opinion pieces that tear down the society that so many of our forefathers shed blood to build.
02/25/08 @ 13:59
Comment from: Judge Smails [Visitor] Email
Well put, putt4par, well put. And, yes, white apologists are the problem, as they have orchestrated our demise. I speak of people such as Ted Kennedy, a loathsome, vile, disgusting creature if ever there was one.

Anyway, even if we did disagree on Bubbles, I like the way you think. If you want to come here, I'll trade Canada 10 wetbacks for one of you any day.

Oh, Wolfie must be getting frosted reading this, but I know he won't respond. You know, he said that he doesn't respond to me when he responded to me. And we know that liberals always keep their word.
02/26/08 @ 12:22
Comment from: Trevor Stevens [Visitor] Email
Just wondering what the extreme rights going to do if Obama becomes the POTUS?
02/27/08 @ 11:43
Comment from: Judge Smails [Visitor] Email
Trevor,

That's an easy one to answer. I will be doing just what I do now, because Obama isn't the problem. We are the problem.
02/27/08 @ 12:01
Comment from: Dot Wong [Member] Email
I love that the Marine was able to decipher from ONE POST that they previous poster was not a conservative but indeed a liberal. As if personal politics can somehow be "sniffed out" by one's choice of verbs and nouns. Good job!

Why would anyone waste time defending O'Reilly and his ilk? We're such a celebrity culture. Is he the keeper of conservative thinking? Is the former host of A Current Affair the guy you're electing?!

If you hold your personal beliefs dear, then you would remove yourself from the screaming and yelling and pointless blathering banter that is on all of these political shows, from Reilly to Olberman to Beck to Rush. It's like someone saying they love fine dining and their favorite restaurant is McDonalds.

They LOWER your beliefs to the most basic, soundbyte-worthy 22 second clip, as if all the colors of you can somehow be summed up in a snarky comment and an eye roll.

I don't understand the conservative deep thinkers on this board who obviously have such a jones for fat head O'Reilly. Why? If you are who you think you are, he doesn't represent you, why do you care?

I find Jon Stewart funny, but I don't LOVE the guy. You hate him? Um, OK. Wow, that doesn't affect me AT ALL.

This isn't about politics, it's celebrity worship. O'Reilly is on the shiny box, so we must love him. It's out of hand.
02/28/08 @ 10:35
Comment from: Judge Smails [Visitor] Email
Wow, Dot Wong rendered an opinion! Let's mark this day on our calendar. I thought her specialty was reporting news after everybody else.

It's funny, Miss Wong, but I didn't see anyone here mounting any kind of gratuitous defense of O'Reilly. As for me, I just defended the truth, which is what I always do. I'm not all that find of O'Reilly, to be frank, but when someone is right, he's right.

Now, onto a different matter. You don't want people to listen to Limbaugh, Beck, O'Reilly and, I assume, anyone else in their category (although O'Reilly really is in a different category from the other two). Pray tell, Miss Wong, from whom should people get their news and commentary? Should it be the New York Times? The Washington Post? Where do you get your information? Or do you have your own news bureaus scattered throughout the world?
02/28/08 @ 12:16
Comment from: Alex [Visitor] Email
Dot Wong,

It is really not that difficult to figure out the political propensities of any persons. All one need do is read waht the writ and listen to what the say.

As an example, I can tell that you are a liberal,although you prefer the term "progressive" or even "moderate".

How do I know as much." Easy. Anyone who thinks Jon Stewart is funny can be nothing but a liberal.

Alex USMC 1969-73
02/28/08 @ 15:19
Comment from: Judge Smails [Visitor] Email
Alex,

People like Wong are incredulous when others can discern such things because they are completely lacking in wisdom. They cannot imagine that anyone could accurately render these judgments because they are incapable of doing so.

There are parallels in other areas, too. When I was in college and playing on one of the athletic teams, I was able to tell a player from a different school that he was a lefty just by looking at him. There was a look of great shock on his face, and, who knows, if I had told him that one could discern such things before actually demonstrating the ability, he might have scoffed the way Wong did. However, it was simply a function of having some rudimentary knowledge of physiology.

Getting back to political inclinations, I used to work with children and could discern how their parents voted based on their behavior. I was seldom wrong. However, people such as Dot Wong find this unfathomable because they aren't invested with the requisite wisdom.
02/28/08 @ 18:37
Comment from: Sultan of Swing [Visitor] Email
Jon Stewart and Bill Maher are idiots. So are Bill O'Reilley and Limbaugh.

These people serve to divide the country, not unite them. They are mouth pieces of the extremists of both ends.

Putting too much weight on what they say is going a disservice to this diverse and great country.
02/29/08 @ 08:36
Comment from: Alex [Visitor] Email
Sorry guys for those letters I omitted. Cold hands.

Sultan,

That is your opinion and you are entitled to it.

I think you'll find that nearly all the divisive language being broadcast comes from the left. The Left constantly criticizes our Armed Forces and praises our enemies as "Freedom Fighters."

They desperately want President Bush impeached although there is no reason for such action. They used the most scurrilous language when referring to the President, his wife , and his children. Conservatives rarely if ever resort to such vile words and actions.

Alex USMC 1969-73
02/29/08 @ 09:00
Comment from: Judge Smails [Visitor] Email
Sultan,

Guess what? Anytime you render an opinion, you're being divisive; this is because a certain percentage of the population will disagree with you. If you love unity so much, I suggest you emigrate to North Korea. Everyone there has the same opinion . . . or at least seems to.
02/29/08 @ 11:52
Comment from: Judge Smails [Visitor] Email
I should also mention, Sultan, that by rendering your opinion, you were being divisive. For instance, Alex and I both don't like it and are now alienated from you.

Maybe you should practice what you preach and bite your tongue in the future.
02/29/08 @ 12:00
Comment from: Wendy (UK) [Visitor]
For his next post Alex will claim "warm heart".

Totally agree with your post, Sultan. Believe you can live with alienation of Judge & Alex?

02/29/08 @ 15:56
Comment from: Alex [Visitor] Email
Wendy,

As a matter of fact,dearie, I do have a warm heart. And I'd advise you to stay on the good sides of Judge and me. Be prudent; do not arouse the wrath fo the Judge or the Leatherneck, sweetie!

Alex USMC 1969-73
03/01/08 @ 09:31
Comment from: Wendy (UK) [Visitor]
Goodness gracious me - what on earth have I said to upset you both? (Just in case I need it for the future).

"When the Himalayan peasant meets the he-bear in his pride,
He SHOUTS to scare the monster who will often turn aside,
But the she-bear thus accosted rends the peasant tooth and nail,
For the female of the species is more deadly than the male".
Well, there goes the last of my Rudyard Kipling, Alex, have to think of something else to counter your dearies and sweeties.

Judge - as a child I sang the hymn "All things bright and beautiful" until I came to the verse
"The rich man in his castle,
The poor man at his gate,
He made them high or lowly,
And ordered their estate"

and realised what the last line really meant. From that day on I have never accepted a God-given role, let alone one you would assign me.

((((Gosh, it really is v. comfortable behind this big sofa. Think I'll have just one more delicious home-made oatmeal cookie before peeking out to see if they have gone. Do they REALLY have GOOD sides?; perhaps on another website then - or another planet)))

03/02/08 @ 10:05
Comment from: Judge Smails [Visitor] Email
Wendy,

You really need some new material, my lady.

You really don't need to be less self-conscious about your femininity. But I'm glad ol' Rudyard's tongue-in-cheek musings make you feel better.
03/02/08 @ 11:11
Comment from: Wendy (UK) [Visitor]
Judge - agreed & already acknowledged I thought, although I shall miss ol' Rudyard in the context of dicing with the Dreaded Duo.

"You really don't need to be less self-concious about your femininity". Is that a double negative or is it the equivalent of "I could care less" which is totally confusing to Brits who say "I couldn't care less"?

03/02/08 @ 13:58
Comment from: Alex [Visitor] Email
Wendy,

You are a shining example of the damage that is being done by militant feminism to otherwise worthwhile females.

Ther is so much for women to do and so little time to do them.

Besides the aforementioned oatmeal cookies, there are always going to be the millions of ubiquitous diapers to change, a task particularly suited for women's capabilities.

Other noble tasks for women in clude scrubbing floors, cleaning latrines, and taking care of the mundane trivia that are beneath the dignity of males.

See Wendy, you ladies have plenty of work to do. And also, you owe it to your husband, if you have one, to remain attractive to him, while maintaining a subservient demeanor.

If you do all these things I have delineated, your will live a lot longer and be a lot more happy.

Alex USMC 1969-73
03/02/08 @ 19:08
Comment from: Wendy (UK) [Visitor]
No surprise to me, Alex, that you still believe in the "toilet fairy".

I hate to break it to you but my highly-paid staff carry out your specific tasks, as I am far too busy powdering my pretty little nose. I would have thought it perfectly obvious that my husband must have married me for my money rather than any trait you might find attractive, including a subservient demeanour, although admittedly I do "look up" to him.
03/03/08 @ 12:37
Comment from: Trevor Stevens [Visitor] Email
Don't neglect the fact that you also have people like Alex to fight for you too...
03/05/08 @ 10:02

Comments are closed for this post.