Because I only quote the portion of the post to which I’m replying. Your freaky fetish for Rosie O’Donnell makes me uncomfortable, so I only respond to the portions where you are making claims generally about human beings.
Well, SA, this fixation with chubby, homely lesbians? Something you would like to share with the group? You’ll feel better…
Nah…actually, I like most chubby, homely lesbians. 
They tend to be pleasant, tactful, compassionate…you know, normal type folk.
It’s…it’s… :: sobs :: it’s just… :: sobs some more :: it’s just…it’s just that I can’t…I can’t fucking stand her!.. :: sobs uncontrollably :: It’s been that way for years!
There…I said it… :: sobs one last time :: Happy now?
Hey, wait…you’re right :: dances happy little jig ::, I feel much better now! Thanks. 
Oh. And here I thought it was just so you could pretend you misunderstood my point. :rolleyes:
I know what you mean. I feel the same way about Fyvish Finkel.
My new favorite word is sitzpinkler. Even if it’s not a real word. 
Those are very well written, specifically the dismantling of Carlos Mencia- an unbearably pitiful career summed up in one paragraph- brilliant!
Mind if I just say what an absolutely perfect analogy that is? Because it is.
Corona makes a “light”? There is no God.
I can’t open the link in the OP because of our library’s filtering software –
– but, if you haven’t read it already, you all might be interested in 101 People Who Are Really Screwing America, written by Jack Huberman as a rejoinder to Bernie Goldberg’s *100 People Who Are Screwing Up America (And Al Franken is #37).*
Again, Rosie was in the right here. Seems to me the parents cared more about what the neighbors thought than their daughter’s happiness. Fuck 'em. Rosie has every right to be able to fuck her girlfriend with sneaking around.
Good point. Would it have made much difference to you, SA, if Rosie had said. “But she wants to fuck me!”?
I have to agree here. Rosie was right to point out her inlaws’ double standard; they’d never have required a son-in-law to buy a second house to cover for the relationship. That’s close to monstrous. Rosie was right to throw a glass of cold water in their faces, figuratively speaking.
:: sigh :: Yes, O’Donnell has a right to fuck her girlfriend without sneaking around. However, IMO, she chose an utterly vile and reprehensible way to express this sentiment to Kelli’s parents…a sentiment that she should not have expressed to begin with even in a benign way. She could have just as easily said something along the line of “But I want to be with her all the time”, or “I don’t want to live in a part-time relationship.” But no, she has to be her typical vulgar, crass, uncaring and unthinking self and blurt out, in effect, “I want to be able to fuck your daughter whenever I want.”
As I said above, whether Kelli’s parents were right or wrong in being troubled by her relationship with Kelli, it doesn’t mean the gloves are off in how you deal with them. They were trying to find, and apparently with Kelli’s assistance, some way to deal with the situation that would be a compromise and allow everyone to get some of what they want until the situation could be sorted out. You don’t forfeit your right to be treated with compassion and respect as a parent just because you hold a view that is politically contrary to that of your daughter or anyone else.
You are a prime example of the belligerence and crassness that has characterized so many of those who have evangelized for social change in this country over the last four or five decades, and you are a prime reason that many of those who would otherwise be open to your POV get their backs up and decide to oppose you because you’re acting like an asshole and they don’t want to support causes championed by assholes for fear that that would become the norm.
And sure enough it has. Hardly a day goes by anymore that I don’t hear or read of someone lamenting how crass and belligerent and shitty day-to-day society in this country has become. If your position is “Fuck 'em, Rosie was right to say what she did,” you’re little better than she is…and that’s not a good thing!
You forgot the part about how its just this kind of thing is why liberals dont ever win any elections.
No, it would only have been better for you…unless O’Donnell wanted to make it a threesome.
Oh, wait…by “me,” you mean O’Donnell? In that case, no, it would have made little difference.
It’s certainly why they don’t win more of them.
Have you ever stopped to ask yourself why, with all the sturm und drang that the media hammers Bush with every day, and with all the problems over Iraq and Social Security and health care, only four or five out of every hundred voters changed their votes in the last election? You guys weren’t elected because you represent what voters want to see accomplished; you were elected because four or five more voters out of a hundred want to see the war end. The majority of American voters (a slim majority admittedly, but a majority nonetheless) are pretty much fed up with what the left has wrought in this country over the last four or five decades and they only vote for you guys in times of extreme duress. So I wouldn’t be gloating too much over the great liberal landslide if I were you.
But other than that, cheers, luci. How ya been?
It’s possible to be right on the merits but to express your point less than diplomatically. If the conversation happened as Rosie describes, and it was the first time the subject had come up, then yeah, Rosie probably could have been more couth.
However, as reasons to hate Rosie O’Donnell go, it’s way down the list. It’s like pitting Hitler for having a silly haircut.
I don’t mind at all. (:
I sure haven’t seen a lot of this, and I’ve been reading the Washington Post.
To put that in perspective, Bush ruled like a king over the past six years because (a) he lost the 2000 popular vote by 0.5 votes out of every 100 votes, but narrowly won the electoral vote; and (b) won the 2004 popular vote by 2.5 votes out of every 100.
I didn’t exactly see you mentioning this a lot before last November.
Compare that with: the Dems won the 2006 House midterms by 8.2 votes out of every 100.
So this was in fact an electoral victory that dwarfed not only both of Bush’s wins by a factor of more than 3, but was practically as big as the GOP’s vote margins in the last three House elections combined, as the link shows.
If it comforts you to believe that, then go right ahead. 