We’ve never needed one. 
Now, now, we all know you’re not into twats, but that’s no reason to go around insulting them. “Icky” is one thing, but “SnoopyFan”? Them’s fightin’ words, buddy.
Well crap… there it is. :smack: sitting between wally and h.o.j.m. I’d swear under oath it wasn’t there before.
c
I have to ask, how are you so sure he is informed to this level? I guess he might be, but it wouldn’t surprise me either way.
You’re right, and I apologize for defaming all the icky twats out there by comparing them to SnoopyFan. This of course raises the question as to what she can be compared to which won’t reflect unfavorably on the compared. Tree slime? The reeking bits of rot that get caught under the edges of untrimmed toenails? What is so wretched and horrible that it would not be insulted by being compared to SnoopyFan? Frankly, I’m stumped.
Perhaps, Otto, instead of finding a suitable comparison, one could merely arrive at the personal conclusion that she is icky in general and move on to more worthwhile things, like the memorization of the names of precambrian protozoa. One never knows when such is likely to be bar-room trivia;)
I think a more comparable argument might be: Imagine some protesters threatened G. W. Bush’s life and most liberals apologized for it. A lot of conservatives would still be all over liberals like the hounds of hell. I suspect they might use an argument of how those liberals are only saying that, but really wouldn’t mind.
Plus, some Christians, especially those of Snoopyfan’s ilk (judging by previous posts), claim persecution anyway.
Billy Graham on a corndog stick, this kind of ignorance is astounding. Willful ignorance, it appears. Shame on you.
Ha! Imagine Ann Coulter saying that liberals wanted it because it evened the score for JFK.
He can read???
He sure can! He’s found Waldo on every page!