I’m thinking of the Judean People’s Front Crack Suicide Squad instead.
Nah. Flubbed the final rhyme. How about:
“But it cleared up with lotion of calamus.”
No such thing as a thread winner, on a behemoth of this size, but I’ll nominate this one for “page winner” for ya. 
Hey, Republicans! You know that abstinence-based sex education you all love?
It don’t work!
Don Rumsfeld throws Dubya under the bus for Iraq:
Now, that is what many people were thinking, but you don’t have to be a cynic to imagine Rumsfeld is just being a self-serving ass.
So where is the stupid idea? After making his argument against nation building in Iraq, he takes a parting shot at Obama, just because:
Which is exactly what he said wouldn’t work in Iraq!
I suppose what he means is we shouldn’t expect an American-style democracy but by all means, keep fucking with other people’s countries.
He doesn’t seem to be objecting to the invasion itself, just that he might have been happier if we’d simply installed another dictator. (Hand-picked by the U.S., of course.)
Because that worked so well for us in Vietnam and Iran.
We tried that. Had one all picked out, even presented him to the world. Remember? Ahmed Chalabi? Special guest of Laura Bush, 2004 State of the Union Address, the “George Washington of Iraq”? He was groomed, packaged, tanned, rested and ready, the head of the Iraqi National Congress. Oopsy daisy.
I don’t think the religious right really understands civil disobedience. Pastors don’t have to marry anyone. No one is going to force them to do anything. How do they plan to challenge these laws? Civil disobedience is when you break a law that you believe unjust. There is no way for them to break laws allowing SSM. Do they plan to show up at weddings and try to stop the proceedings?
I suppose they could incite their flock to defy the law and discriminate against gays. No cake for you!
I’m kind of wondering how seriously that angle could be pursued. How many Americans would decide that their businesses will not serve homosexuals on purely religious grounds? I’m guessing not more than a loudmouthed handful and it would probably force a SCOTUS anti-discrimination ruling (no doubt called an infringement on religion by opponents), but there’d be some short-term kerfuffling.
Most likely of course is it being yet another futile cry for attention from the wrong side of history.
They forgot to specify which bible! Hijinks!
He was also, if memory serves, playing footsie with Iranian intelligence (who were only too happy to supply him with “rock solid” evidence concerning Saddam Hussein’s WMD programs, which he dutifully fed back to Bush & Cie.).
Yes, the dumbest thing I’ve heard all day.
You know what? Let’s test this. We’ll bring those who supported this into a biology classroom, give them a bible, a fetal pig, and tell them to locate and remove the heart, lungs, kidneys, etc. Let’s see if they pass.
Make it The Brick Testament.
I see Republican lawmakers as failed businessmen who got a new job working for more successful businessmen, and who want to run the government like they would run a business: as a money-making enterprise, with “winners” and “losers” based on networking and clever trickery, and without excessive interference by government agencies actually acting like government agencies.
(Referring to Wisconsin legislators trying to kill the watchdog bureau.)
It is odd that in their quest to open the options for learning, the only religious text included is the bible.
Ha-ha no it’s not, this is a Republican idea, ha ha…
Oh god save us from these Republican dum-shits! I’ll pray. I swear I will!! Just make IT FUCKING EVOLVE ALREADY!!