Obama and the Muslim Nation tour.

[RetiredGySgt]

An ass-backwards redneck clown like you doesn't know anything. Maybe you should provide a little evidence before opening your mouth and babbling, idiot.

Well this can be readily solved...

Agnapostate, are you stating, as a fact, that you never implied, nor did you seek to encourage an inference that children should be allowed to engage in coitus at their own discretion, with whomever fell into their favor?

Answer that with a definitive yes or no and we'll examine the record of your posts... if what you declare to be factual is true, then you'll have a public vindication; if what you say is false; then you will be certified as a lying child ****** of the first order; an advocate of the normalization of sexual abnormality; a sexual deviant and a danger to children and whatever culture in which you are found at any given moment.

So what it is sis... Yay or nay?

The whole exercise shouldn't take long...

(Aggrevated-Prostate will now be struck with a severe reticence... a distinct lack of interests in this discussion... for what should be obvious reasons.)

This is a dumb post.

He clearly indicates that he debates the rationality of the standard definition of minority. In that context, your question doesn't make any sense, as you and he are obviously using different definitions of "childhood."

I am guessing based on the silly and childish (by either definition I would think) insistence on a "yay or nay" answer that you realize how silly your question is. If you hadn't realized it before (and that would make you pretty dim), you should now.

Ya so like a guy that justifies screwing children, he thinks it is ok to screw children cause he believes they can give informed consent. Sorry legally and morally they can NOT.

There is no objective way to "test" for adulthood in teens. Further using his logic we should be able to try any teen we want under adult laws when they commit crimes cause after all he insists they are adults.

 

[ReillyT]

Well this can be readily solved...

Agnapostate, are you stating, as a fact, that you never implied, nor did you seek to encourage an inference that children should be allowed to engage in coitus at their own discretion, with whomever fell into their favor?

Answer that with a definitive yes or no and we'll examine the record of your posts... if what you declare to be factual is true, then you'll have a public vindication; if what you say is false; then you will be certified as a lying child ****** of the first order; an advocate of the normalization of sexual abnormality; a sexual deviant and a danger to children and whatever culture in which you are found at any given moment.

So what it is sis... Yay or nay?

The whole exercise shouldn't take long...

(Aggrevated-Prostate will now be struck with a severe reticence... a distinct lack of interests in this discussion... for what should be obvious reasons.)

This is a dumb post.

He clearly indicates that he debates the rationality of the standard definition of minority. In that context, your question doesn't make any sense, as you and he are obviously using different definitions of "childhood."

I am guessing based on the silly and childish (by either definition I would think) insistence on a "yay or nay" answer that you realize how silly your question is. If you hadn't realized it before (and that would make you pretty dim), you should now.

Ya so like a guy that justifies screwing children, he thinks it is ok to screw children cause he believes they can give informed consent. Sorry legally and morally they can NOT.

There is no objective way to "test" for adulthood in teens. Further using his logic we should be able to try any teen we want under adult laws when they commit crimes cause after all he insists they are adults.

I don't believe he ever suggested (that I know of) that they can give legal consent. I don't even know if he thinks the law should be changed, as the law has to be applied, and you are right that trying to apply it on an individual assessment of maturity would be logistically nuts. He just says that 18 is a rather arbitrary number for what is a social construct, and that if one wanted to apply a system that was rationally designed to identify maturity, this would not be it.

I don't know what moral consent is.

There is no objective way to "test" for adulthood. That is exactly what he is saying. The rest of what he is saying you clearly don't understand.

He would not be saying that we should try any teen as an adult. He would probably say that we should look on a case by case basis to determine if the teen is mature enough to be held to an adult standard.

This isn't difficult stuff. Adulthood as a social construct? It is sociology 101.

 

[RetiredGySgt]

This is a dumb post.

He clearly indicates that he debates the rationality of the standard definition of minority. In that context, your question doesn't make any sense, as you and he are obviously using different definitions of "childhood."

I am guessing based on the silly and childish (by either definition I would think) insistence on a "yay or nay" answer that you realize how silly your question is. If you hadn't realized it before (and that would make you pretty dim), you should now.

Ya so like a guy that justifies screwing children, he thinks it is ok to screw children cause he believes they can give informed consent. Sorry legally and morally they can NOT.

There is no objective way to "test" for adulthood in teens. Further using his logic we should be able to try any teen we want under adult laws when they commit crimes cause after all he insists they are adults.

I don't believe he ever suggested (that I know of) that they can give legal consent. I don't even know if he thinks the law should be changed, as the law has to be applied, and you are right that trying to apply it on an individual assessment of maturity would be logistically nuts. He just says that 18 is a rather arbitrary number for what is a social construct, and that if one wanted to apply a system that was rationally designed to identify maturity, this would not be it.

I don't know what moral consent is.

There is no objective way to "test" for adulthood. That is exactly what he is saying. The rest of what he is saying you clearly don't understand.

He would not be saying that we should try any teen as an adult. He would probably say that we should look on a case by case basis to determine if the teen is mature enough to be held to an adult standard.

This isn't difficult stuff. Adulthood as a social construct? It is sociology 101.

Well except for the fact he ARGUED sex with teenagers should be left to the teenagers to decided NO MATTER the age of their partner. And he still argues that.

 

[p kirkes]

I read President Obama's speech on Yahoo this AM and IMO it was a very good speech.

The task of implementing the objectives he seeks now remains. If successful then the world may be a better place, if not, then it's more of the same plus his credibility to get things done will suffer.

Regards,

 

[Fraulein Hilda]

What credibility to get things done? What got done? When?

 

[Agnapostate]

we're still waiting for you! how long's it gonna take doyathink?

You already said that I said something accurate to bones. Pay attention to the topic donkeyface, whydonchya?

Well this can be readily solved...

Agnapostate, are you stating, as a fact, that you never implied, nor did you seek to encourage an inference that children should be allowed to engage in coitus at their own discretion, with whomever fell into their favor?

I stated that age restrictions were excessively arbitrary and could not sufficiently determine maturity, and as a result of that, individuals should be permitted to function as "adults" at whatever age they proved themselves capable of doing so. I merely included the right to govern one's own sex life for the purpose of consistency, not because it's a topic of any special or additional focus to me.

Answer that with a definitive yes or no and we'll examine the record of your posts... if what you declare to be factual is true, then you'll have a public vindication; if what you say is false; then you will be certified as a lying child ****** of the first order; an advocate of the normalization of sexual abnormality; a sexual deviant and a danger to children and whatever culture in which you are found at any given moment.

If the assertions about me being pro-pedophile were true, and I promoted sexual contact with young children day in and day out (and they're not), that still wouldn't make me a pedophile any more than supporters of gay rights are homosexuals.

Ya so like a guy that justifies screwing children, he thinks it is ok to screw children cause he believes they can give informed consent. Sorry legally and morally they can NOT.

That's not true. Very little of my focus has been on the capacities of genuine children to offer informed and rational consent (though I'd certainly be willing to acknowledge it if it obviously existed), so much as on the ability of adolescents to do so, and adolescents are merely biological adults infantilized by elements of Western culture rather than genuine children. I've argued that adolescents and some younger people generally have the capacity to make informed and rational decisions about their own welfare, based on such empirical research as Weithorn and Campbell's The competency of children and adolescents to make informed treatment decisions.

This study was a test for developmental differences in competency to make informed treatment decisions. 96 subjects, 24 (12 males and 12 females) at each of 4 age levels (9, 14, 18, and 21), were administered a measure developed to assess competency according to 4 legal standards. The measure included 4 hypothetical treatment dilemmas and a structured interview protocol. Overall, 14-year-olds did not differ from adults. 9-year-olds appeared less competent than adults with respect to their ability to reason about and understand the treatment information provided in the dilemmas. However, they did not differ from older subjects in their expression of reasonable preferences regarding treatment. It is concluded that the findings do not support the denial of the right of self-determination to adolescents in health-care situations on the basis of a presumption of incapacity. Further, children as young as 9 appear able to participate meaningfully in personal health-care decision making.

From that empirical research, I've extrapolated my assessment that adolescents and some younger persons generally possess or could generally possess the capacity to make informed and rational decisions about their own welfare. For some reason, posters here saw fit to focus only on sexual issues. I don't know why.

There is no objective way to "test" for adulthood in teens.

Actually, there are competency tests that have been proposed, most recently and notably by the psychologist Robert Epstein.

Further using his logic we should be able to try any teen we want under adult laws when they commit crimes cause after all he insists they are adults.

Gee...that's right.

And that's precisely what I advocate. All this proves is that you're either ignorant or deliberately dismissive of my opposition to other age restrictions (the working age, the voting age, the drinking age, etc.), and merely focus on the age of sexual consent alone because it makes for good tabloidism.

Well except for the fact he ARGUED sex with teenagers should be left to the teenagers to decided NO MATTER the age of their partner. And he still argues that.

There's no legitimate divergence between you and me. Hopefully, we both agree that only those capable of making rational and informed decisions should be able to govern their own sexual affairs. Now, you assert that most teenagers are incapable of making such decisions; I've referred to empirical research on which to base my claim to the contrary. However, if your claim is indeed correct, then I'm perfectly content to prohibit teenagers and other youth from making such decisions simply on the basis of their incompetence, but not their age. So if you're indeed correct in claiming that they'd generally not be capable of making such a decision, there's no distinction between us anyway; I'd agree with your position based on the grounds of their incompetence and there should be no meaningful divergence.

 

[JW Frogen]

Aggie thinks that sex begins at puberty.

It is the old Garden of Eden myth.

What he does not understand is that all sex ends with explusion and consequence, and only time, wisdom and age can prepare one for the cost of the apple bite.

 

[PubliusInfinitum]

I believe that after 60 years they have proven they can and do get along JUST fine. Ohh and retard? They have Arabs that are Citizens too, with all the same rights and protections. In fact last time I counted there were at least 12 Arabs in the Knesset One of whom was the second highest member of his Political group which was NOT an Arab group.

Um...so? I notice this is somehow conveniently ignored in the case of Iranian Jews...

The more important reality is the ongoing bigotry toward Palestinians in Israel by Israeli Jews that is not paralleled by Palestinian bigotry toward Jews, though that is certainly also a reality.

You on the other hand have , in the past, indicated screwing children was a preference of yours

Immediately provide documentation of this allegation. You of course won't be able to, since it's a lie. But you deserve to be called out when you spew bullshit like this.

and argued and continue to argue that CHILDREN should be free to **** at, what was it? 12? With anyone they wanted to.

I never supported any specific set age. I said that 18 was an arbitrary age of majority, that our conceptions of childhood and adolescence were recent social constructs, and that an individual should be permitted to obtain adult rights and responsibilities at whatever age they proved that they were capable of handling them in an informed and rational manner. In that respect, what I say doesn't substantially differ from what Newt Gingrich says.

I got this one Gunny...

The Aggrevated Prostate, as is her tendency, comes once again to make conflicting and otherwise vague references, which merely serves to take up space...

For starters, there are no Jews in the government of Iran... thus there is no comparison to be made; against Israel... where Arabs are present in her government and not only present, but present in positions of substantial authority.

Secondly, the bigotry demonstrated by the Palestinians is monstrous and would shame the worst of the southern rednecks...

The Palestinians run CARTOONS which of course target PALESTINIAN CHILDREN, which serve to 'INFORM' those children that Jews are DEMONS... that they seek to kill Arab children and use their blood and bones to make pastries and other assorted Jewish tasties... and MUCH MUCH WORSE... Bigotry against Jews in Palestine is an essential part of their CULTURE.

There is no correlating, competing propaganda of such bigotry in Isreal against the would-be "Palestinians"... What's more, Israel has not ONCE violated ANY agreement which they have made, without provocation stemming from a violation of the agreement made by the would-be 'Palestinians'...

EACH encounter with the Palestinians is a result of a Palestinian attack on Israel... without a SINGLE example of the inverse. Thus you're simply trying to invert responsibility and turn the aggressor into the victim; but such is the nature of the deciever...

With regard to your tacit denial of the Gunney's assertion that you're an advocate of adult/child sex... you DEMAND evidence that you've ever advocated for such and then go to work advocating for such...

I never supported any specific set age. I said that 18 was an arbitrary age of majority, that our conceptions of childhood and adolescence were recent social constructs, and that an individual should be permitted to obtain adult rights and responsibilities at whatever age they proved that they were capable of handling them in an informed and rational manner.

What you've just implied is that you feel that where a child is demonstrating the cognitive means to consent to coitus, that such should be legal...

You're a FUCKIN' PERV... the MOMENT that "SCIENCE" proclaims that Children ARE intellectual suitable for such, you'll be down at the day-care applying for a job.

Here's the thing Chester... CHILDREN ARE NOT TO BE SEXUALIZED!

PERIOD... There's no rationalizing around it... NO means for SCIENCE to contest it...

That's the rule and it ain't changin'...

And yes, it's our opinion and yes... it's a rule with which you disagree and yes... we're prepared to go to war, to provide in finality the determination as to who it is, that gets to make that call.

 

[LaLinda75]

Can anybody tell me which planet Obama landed on earth from??????

 

[PubliusInfinitum]

An ass-backwards redneck clown like you doesn't know anything. Maybe you should provide a little evidence before opening your mouth and babbling, idiot.

Well this can be readily solved...

Agnapostate, are you stating, as a fact, that you never implied, nor did you seek to encourage an inference that children should be allowed to engage in coitus at their own discretion, with whomever fell into their favor?

Answer that with a definitive yes or no and we'll examine the record of your posts... if what you declare to be factual is true, then you'll have a public vindication; if what you say is false; then you will be certified as a lying child ****** of the first order; an advocate of the normalization of sexual abnormality; a sexual deviant and a danger to children and whatever culture in which you are found at any given moment.

So what it is sis... Yay or nay?

The whole exercise shouldn't take long...

(Aggrevated-Prostate will now be struck with a severe reticence... a distinct lack of interests in this discussion... for what should be obvious reasons.)

This is a dumb post.

He clearly indicates that he debates the rationality of the standard definition of minority. In that context, your question doesn't make any sense, as you and he are obviously using different definitions of "childhood."

I am guessing based on the silly and childish (by either definition I would think) insistence on a "yay or nay" answer that you realize how silly your question is. If you hadn't realized it before (and that would make you pretty dim), you should now.

Ahh... yet another of those who have the AUDACITY TO HOPE... coming to advocate for the liberalizations of the standards which prohibit Adult/Child sex...

Ya see, there are more than one definition of a child... There's the tot, the toddler, the whelp... the crumb cruncher, the motorcycle engine... all the way up to the adult child...

Everyone is familiar with the adult child, RIGHT?

These are the children who otherwise possess the intellectual means of an adult; the experience which bears their adult perspective... and it's not fair to mischaracterize the position of the left. who OBVIOUSLY are only advocating that ADULT CHILDREN be considered suitable for coitus...

Everyone up to speed on that?

Ya see it's NOT enlightened to reject "SCIENCE" which would otherwise establish that CHILDREN are perfectly acceptable sexual partners... because SCIENCE is an incontestable authority... and 'everyone knows THAT...'

ROFL... freakin' pervs...

 

[Agnapostate]

Yes! By all means, let's decipher the nefarious schemes of the Left! Would this be "left" enough, Pubicus? Interesting description..."Former House Speaker Newt Gingrich says young people need to shift more quickly from childhood to adulthood."

It's time to declare the end of adolescence. As a social institution, it's been a failure...The solution is dramatic and unavoidable: We have to end adolescence as a social experiment. We tried it. It failed. It's time to move on. Returning to an earlier, more successful model of children rapidly assuming the roles and responsibilities of adults would yield enormous benefit to society.

Prior to the 19th century, it's fair to say that adolescence did not exist. Instead, there was virtually universal acceptance that puberty marked the transition from childhood to young adulthood.

By all means, feel free to identify the normalization of adult/child sex clearly on Speaker Gingrich's mind.

 

[Just A Man]

Back on topic --

Here's my take on the speech -- and I have seen only the parts of Obama's speech that the media have provided. More selected news. But overall I think it was a grand speech and many points needed to be said for the world to hear. If Obama is speaking from his core beliefs, and I have to assume he is although others probably wrote the speech with his input, the man is very naïve to think he can talk all Muslims into liking us, or getting Palestine and Israel to get along. The bad guys will continue to do what they want while laughing at Obama for apologizing for the U.S.

Listening to the parts of the speech, I was reminded of the League of Nations, the United Nations, and Neville Chamberlain. In the present the media and many in the world will praise Obama for his words but history will show him to be a fool. He needs a crash course in Human Nature 101. Shakespeare said it best . . . "Diseased nature oftentimes breaks forth in strange eruptions . . . "

 

[PubliusInfinitum]

If the assertions about me being pro-pedophile were true, and I promoted sexual contact with young children day in and day out (and they're not), that still wouldn't make me a pedophile any more than supporters of gay rights are homosexuals.

Well, while it's true that not everyone that advocates for 'super-rights' for homosexuals is a homosexual; it is true that most of those who do... ARE. And further, that the advocacy OF the normalization of Homosexuality can only result in MORE OF IT... such an advocacy demonstrates, with regard to your assessment relevant to your BEING A CHILD ******, that such is a distinction without a difference.

That you promote such, demonstrates your guilt OF SUCH. Just as were you to be advocating for mass murder; in so doing you would be promoting the interests OF those who engage IN MASS MURDER, thus relegating you to MASS MURDERER STATUS.

... Very little of my focus has been on the capacities of genuine children to offer informed and rational consent (though I'd certainly be willing to acknowledge it if it obviously existed), so much as on the ability of adolescents to do so, and adolescents are merely biological adults infantilized by elements of Western culture rather than genuine children. I've argued that adolescents and some younger people generally have the capacity to make informed and rational decisions about their own welfare, based on such empirical research as Weithorn and Campbell's The competency of children and adolescents to make informed treatment decisions.

Ahhh yes... SCIENCE! "Empirical EVIDENCE"...

Thus, again, where SCIENCE determines that children are suitable for coitus... this member adheres to that SCIENTIFIC CONCLUSION...

The member finds that Adult/child sex and the relevant taboos are arbitrary and do not reflect the EMPIRICAL EVIDENCE which SCIENCE has objectively observed in establishing their conclusions that 'many children may actually BENEFIT from consensual sexual relationships with adults...'

http://www.ipce.info/library_3/rbt/metaana.pdf

From that empirical research, I've extrapolated my assessment that adolescents and some younger persons generally possess or could generally possess the capacity to make informed and rational decisions about their own welfare. For some reason, posters here saw fit to focus only on sexual issues. I don't know why.

Oh I can help ya with that... this is due to there being no actual cultural benefit for such an opinion, except where the goal is intended to serve an end... and no end has advanced such means MORE VOCIFEROUSLY THAN THE ADVOCATES OF ADULT/CHILD SEX.

The idea is to cull from the discussion any moral underpinnings; thus long standing cultural mores are determined to be unreasonable restrictions on children...

The problem of course comes when one realizes that there is no alternative basis for such 'studies'... thus the entire 'study' is a ruse... one which seeks to do nothing more than establish the erroneous notion that a child is capable of informed consent...

Get that established and VIOLA! It's party time at the DAY CARE!

Actually, there are competency tests that have been proposed, most recently and notably by the psychologist Robert Epstein.

Yes, no doubt they are... and that 'study' is no less a function of that noted above than any other such 'study'...

Further using his logic we should be able to try any teen we want under adult laws when they commit crimes cause after all he insists they are adults.

Gee...that's right.

And that's precisely what I advocate. All this proves is that you're either ignorant or deliberately dismissive of my opposition to other age restrictions (the working age, the voting age, the drinking age, etc.), and merely focus on the age of sexual consent alone because it makes for good tabloidism.

Well, the reason we don't try teens as adults is that they lack the perspective required to understand the ramifications of their ACTIONS.

Thus, trying a juvenile as a juvenile provides a Mulligan... a "Do-over"... Sexualizing children, rationalizing that they DO possess the perspective to understand the ramifications sets that 'huss' aside...

But there's no end to examples which provide peremptory contest to this drivel...

Go to ANY government sponsored health center... walk into the waiting room and look around... you'll find 20-30 teenage 'girls' sitting there either pregnant or screaching at their snotty nosed hellians... Er.. huh.. their progeny.

Ask them if they were intellectually aware of the full scope of the ramifications of their actions...

Your answer will be a unanimous 'OH HELL NO Honey... I had NO IDEA what I was getting into...' The old days of sleepin' in, waiting for Mommy to come and wake them up for SCHOOL are OVER... the Days of cruising with their buds over the lazy summer ARE BEHIND THEM...

So what we find, through THIS EMPIRICAL EVIDENCE IS THAT: They're ADULTS NOW... They NOW HAVE THE PERSPECTIVE OF AN ADULT. Because they acted as an Adult BEFORE THEY HAD THE NECESSARY UNDERSTANDING TO PROVIDE INFORMED CONSENT...


Thus, they were not capable of such WHEN YOU CLAIM THAT THEY WERE OTHERWISE PERFECTLY QUALIFIED ....

 

[Red Dawn]

Here we go, from the Muslim world itself.

Don't lecture us: Arabs tell Obama - Yahoo! News

So are you American Jews ready for when Obama cuts Israel off or threatens to? You all voted for him after all and people like Jillian are faithful Obambots, reading the daily talking points and mindlessly following them.

why are you rightwingers so obssessed over who jews vote for?

And why, as a good christian, do you feel compelled to lie so much?


You know that there is zero chance Obama will cut off aid to israel. Not a chance in hell he will do that.

I would bet you one thousand dollars he won't, and you either wouldn't take the bet, or you would stiff me when you lost. Because you know I'm right, and you know that your lying.

 

[PubliusInfinitum]

Here we go, from the Muslim world itself.

Don't lecture us: Arabs tell Obama - Yahoo! News

So are you American Jews ready for when Obama cuts Israel off or threatens to? You all voted for him after all and people like Jillian are faithful Obambots, reading the daily talking points and mindlessly following them.

why are you rightwingers so obssessed over who jews vote for?

And why, as a good christian, do you feel compelled to lie so much?


You know that there is zero chance Obama will cut off aid to israel. Not a chance in hell he will do that.

I would bet you one thousand dollars he won't, and you either wouldn't take the bet, or you would stiff me when you lost. Because you know I'm right, and you know that your lying.

ROFLMNAO... He's in the process of doing that RIGHT NOW...

But hey... You've taken the position that such is not the case and when such comes to pass I've book marked this post so we can return to you emphatic assurance...

Now how should we hold you accountable for this?

Any suggestions?

 

[Red Dawn]

Here we go, from the Muslim world itself.

Don't lecture us: Arabs tell Obama - Yahoo! News

So are you American Jews ready for when Obama cuts Israel off or threatens to?

You all voted for him after all and people like Jillian are faithful Obambots, reading the daily talking points and mindlessly following them.

this is what pyschologists call Projection.

Retarded Gunny Sarge spent 8 years worshipping at the altar of George Dumbya Bush, spending hours every day defending Bush, and having sexual fantasies about his hero Bush.

 

[MaggieMae]

Here we go, from the Muslim world itself.

Don't lecture us: Arabs tell Obama - Yahoo! News

So are you American Jews ready for when Obama cuts Israel off or threatens to? You all voted for him after all and people like Jillian are faithful Obambots, reading the daily talking points and mindlessly following them.

Flaw, I'm Jewish and I didn't vote for him. Also, I don't care about Israel ...

Ironically, most American Jews care more about all the money in aid the U.S. pours into Israel and never sees any results. After all, they are taxpayers too.

The younger generations (let's say below 60) also are not hardliners like their elders. They are more reality driven than historically and ideology driven, recognizing that the future for Israel does NOT lie in pissing off the rest of the world (including its Arab neighbors, which also have younger generations opposing their own elders).

 

[MaggieMae]

I believe that after 60 years they have proven they can and do get along JUST fine. Ohh and retard? They have Arabs that are Citizens too, with all the same rights and protections. In fact last time I counted there were at least 12 Arabs in the Knesset One of whom was the second highest member of his Political group which was NOT an Arab group.

Um...so? I notice this is somehow conveniently ignored in the case of Iranian Jews...

The more important reality is the ongoing bigotry toward Palestinians in Israel by Israeli Jews that is not paralleled by Palestinian bigotry toward Jews, though that is certainly also a reality.



Immediately provide documentation of this allegation. You of course won't be able to, since it's a lie. But you deserve to be called out when you spew bullshit like this.

and argued and continue to argue that CHILDREN should be free to **** at, what was it? 12? With anyone they wanted to.

I never supported any specific set age. I said that 18 was an arbitrary age of majority, that our conceptions of childhood and adolescence were recent social constructs, and that an individual should be permitted to obtain adult rights and responsibilities at whatever age they proved that they were capable of handling them in an informed and rational manner. In that respect, what I say doesn't substantially differ from what Newt Gingrich says.

I have no intention of going through your slimy messages on this board. I was here and read what you had to say. As have anyone else that was around when you made the argument. Your little " WAH" he caught me routine doesn't wash with me.

By the way, how old are you today? 18? Or was that 50?

Um, Sarge, who started with the slime? Is this not YOU in your very first response?
"Moron. You would love the middle East, they like to screw little boys over there."

Seems to me you're the one with either a nine-year old inner child dying to get out, or you have the memory span of a gnat.

 

[MaggieMae]

Another America sucks and I apologize whirlwind tour.

You people really deserve sympathy instead of criticism if that's all you got out of it.

 

[MaggieMae]

Another America sucks and I apologize whirlwind tour.

He declared the Muslin nation a "Nation of Tolerance" I went rolling right off the couch! onto the floor and bumped my little head! cried out in agony, peed in my pants,, and popped open a bottle of beer and it's 5 oclock in the morning.

Isn't that a normal day for you? By the way, I can't find that specific passage anywhere in his speech.