And why am I seeing Lib as Margaret Dumont (with a touch of Baby Jane Hudson)?
Damned if I know; whatever one thinks of Lib, his online persona isn’t anything remotely like ‘stuffy grand dame’, which was Dumont’s onscreen persona in the Marx Brothers movies.
Please, look at the orotund, stilted style of his prose and tell me that doesn’t have the large-bosomed Dumont look. And of course the Baby Jane Hudson is added to reflect his freewheeling insanity.
Nah, Eve as Margaret Dumont would be more fun to see.
Really!
She has copped to the monobosom
And don’t forget that you promised that “chewers will be pursued, and in the hoosegow hidden.”
The current occupant has that one covered real well.
And he’s given Ashcroft the responsibility for:
If any form of pleasure is exhibited
report to me and it will be prohibited
I’ll put my foot down, so shall it be
this is the land of the free.
It has been told to me that I write in the manner of Ayn Rand.
As in my advocacy that peaceful honest people should be free to pursue their own happiness in their own way?
I have no problem with that. But I prefer to advocate for people who actually exist in this world; those in heaven are already doing fine, I assume.
Are you saying, for example, that there is no way in reality that two men could marry each other without initial force or deception between them or against them by others?
Congratulations on another successful hijack!
Would that we had learned the lessons of 9/11, and stopped allowing hijackers to succeed.
Daniel
[sub]wondering if that was in incredibly poor taste[/sub]
I presume that you mean me. That you mean that I hijacked the thread. That you mean that I hijacked the thread with my post #88. That you mean that I hijacked the thread by responding directly to Gobear’s post #81 about Margaret Dumont and Baby Jane Hudson. I presume that you mean to say that I, by some time-travelling miracle, responded to Gobear before he even posted. I presume also that aside from being a busybody, you are a fucking idiot.
I don’t presume that you listen to me any more, but this is no way to speak to your God.
Daniel
Perhaps as a man of honor, Daniel, since you were posting anyway, you could have bothered to point out the obvious fact that my post followed Gobear’s. Instead, you chose to make an irrelevant joke about 9/11. Then, following my defense of myself, you chose to correct me instead of agree with me. Yes, I am honest with my God, and I tell Him when I’m angry. I tell him to go fuck Himself in times of dispair and depression. He returns only love. You have become like Satan whispering advice from scripture, taking advantage of weak moments to stab me with knives made of words. You ignore the entire substance of the post, which you know to be right, and lift from it a portion which you can use to berate me, belittle me, and join the pile on. I will listen to a man when he cares about me. But you clearly do not.
Lib, look up. See the top of the page?
We’re in the Pit. If you want to listen to people who care about you, this is probably not the forum to hang out in.
Torture: wasn’t this whole thing about torture at one point?
Although, sitting through yet another Lib harangue is indeed torture, of the mental variety. Not nearly the same thing as having one’s nails pulled, but I suppose it’ll have to do.
I know, no more punishment for me. Time to go upstairs and make The Wife get to work. It’s a sweaty business, but someone’s got to do it. (Where is that damn cat o’ nine tails when you need it, anyway? Ah yes, The Dog has it. And she’s gnawing on it. The bitch.)
I would say the fucking goddam shit has been hijacked out of this thread. What the fuck does any of this shit have to do with Abu Ghraib? Zip.
Let’s get it back on track, then, shall we?
Desmostylus, I can’t get to the article. I watched the commercial for the day pass, but it took me to the front page. Can you provide the set of links that will take us to what you’ve cited? It certainly appears to be a monstrous and outrageous abuse of power.