Consider this soul….Sold!
So I got bored and made this little compilation and I decided to go down the road of being that guy that basically just cuts up other clip compilations, puts a new song on it, watermarks it, and trys to shamelessly promote a totally unrelated website. I’m almost embarrassed. Almost.
Seriously though, when THIS is the current President, it is really fair to question Obama’s “readiness to lead?” I mean, Obama should honestly put out an ad like this. It would be HUGE news, very bold, a hit with a certain youth crowd, and it’s just clips of the actual Pres. Nothing is getting doctored here, which is the sad part.
I hate myself,
-Fitz
August 8, 2008 at 11:59 pm
This guy is a blundering an idiot that has made a fool of himself and us to the world for the last 8 years. What a waste
August 9, 2008 at 12:04 am
I’m taking a shocking stance on this: George W. Bush is a hell of a guy. Look at that bitch jiving and wailing. His tactless, unprofessional demeanor becomes almost admirable after long enough. It’s surreal. This is our president. So much so, we voted him in twice(at least 1.5 times).To set the bar sooooo low, that any future contender must only be better than that, simply amazing.
Republicans, on the issue of George W. Bush, I say well-played.
August 9, 2008 at 4:30 pm
George W. Bush is a brave and decent man. I find it despicable Fitz that you would go to such lengths as to use so many video clips out of context to somehow try and manipulate and influence our president’s pristine, unblemished reputation around the world. So he drops his dog, bumps his head, and frequently gets confused during speeches. Does that somehow take away from the fact that that he was the one chosen by God himself to lead us to invade Iraq to protect ALL of our freedoms? George Bush is the reason you’re free Fitz. Plain and simple. You complain that he can tap your phones, enter your home without warrant or knowledge, detain you indefinately without habeas corpus and torture you? These laws keep us all free Fitz. With George W. Bush as our fearless leader we are safe from TERRORISTS! Obama wants to bing our troops HOME! Can you imagine that?! Then who will fight the terrorists and protect us all? Then who Fitz? You?
August 9, 2008 at 4:56 pm
Wow, I’m standing here at the mall and people are wondering why i’m laughing to myself…. well played anton.
August 10, 2008 at 5:21 pm
somehow I think that Sean Hannity has started posting on this website under the pseudonym “anton.” And I couldn’t agree with him more. Even though he comes across as a less-than-average man, I agree with “anton.” I think all of those mistakes and fumbles are just a cover up for possibly the greatest president to ever have lived. I am free, no terrorist has blown my home up or taken my cable tv from me, so I feel obliged to pay him my respect. He keeps the fighting thousands of miles away from me and lets me busy myself with concerns like sports and where I buy my next pair of jeans, which in my book is freedom. So keep up the good work W….my freedom wouldn’t seem so free without you.
August 10, 2008 at 11:09 pm
DAMN!!! How can i say this? That muthafucka is stupid. Just when i thought white people had rymthm. DAMN!!!
LEONARD WASHINGTON- IM OUT BITCHES!!!!
August 12, 2008 at 11:36 am
Yesterday, at the Olympics, they showed a picture of Bush sitting in the stands, smiling and holding up a big US flag. Appropriately, he was holding the flag backwards. I guess this says it all. “Everything looks good from where I’m sitting”. In his interview with Bob Costas the other day in Beijing, when Bob asked him about our current economic woes and our preceived stature in the world, Bush answered, “Actually, Bob, I think we’re doing pretty good.” OK, that may not be a direct quote, but it’s close. The reality is, is that this guy is the same fucking baffoon he has always been, but as President, he has a huge ontourage around him, whose job it is is to keep him from making a complete idiot of himself as much as possible. Obviously, there are times when Bush has ventured out on his own, moments of which you have aptly captured on your video. We must, however, not loose sight in one crucial fact. As we all laugh and make fun of this asshole, we, the people who put this guy in office, are being fucked, and fucked royally. Not by Bush, himself, but by the people behind him, whose policies and agenda Bush and his cronies have continued to push for the last eight years. We MUST NOT EVER FORGET THAT WE BROUGHT THIS SHIT ON OURSELVES AND ONLY WE CAN CORRECT THE SITUATION. WE MUST NOT LOOSE OUR ENTHUSIASM FOR CHANGE AND OUR BELIEF IN THE FACT THAT WE CAN AND WILL MAKE A DIFFERENCE.
August 12, 2008 at 12:31 pm
George W Bush is the dark knight. He is the batman of our generation. He knows that in doing the right thing people will hate him. But a hero isn’t always liked. After 9/11 has there been another terrorist attack on the US? nope…he’s doing something right. God bless George Bush, God bless America, and God bless Batman
August 12, 2008 at 12:42 pm
and on a more serious note…We all agree George Bush is a complete moron, and has a difficulty with speeches a 3rd grader could recite. But I can’t go without bashing Barack Obama too. Mostly because i hate all presidential canidates. the only way to get into that position of power is to lie cheat and steal your way in. so anyone who thinks Barack is some knight in shining armor coming in to bring purity to the white house is probably an idealist. We don’t need Idealists in this country. And Barrack basically is claiming he’s going to change most everything the bush administration put into place. THAT IS A HORRIBLE IDEA. yes a few things need to change. but just running in and changing 98 years of policy would be a GIANT mistake for the country. I just everyone especially Barack supporters should read the new newsweek. There’s an article by Fareed Zakaria called “What Bush Got Right” and it’s baout this very subject. very insightful stuff.
next week i’ll comment on how McCain could destroy the world in less than4 years.
August 12, 2008 at 1:28 pm
Well, I think Obama to some extent has the internet to thank. I think the Democratic Party “assumed” Hilary would just raise up and take it, but through the open and uncontrolled information online, he was able to be noticed by more people and received a huge amount of online donations. Much in the same way Ron Paul has gained so much popularity, although traditional media has done a good job of ignoring him. I will say that I think he probably had to make some under the table deals to gain full support from the party, regaurdless of how the vote was going. Something like, “Well the people like you, but we can turn this to Hilary if you don’t say/do ____, ____, and _____.” So I guess I’m saying I believe his “level of corruption” to be as low as it can be and still be viable. Of course, thers really no way to know, because if there was, that whole system would be pointless. It does seem more and more that the candidate speaks for the campaign, instead of the campaign speaking for the candidate.
As for Fareed Zakaria, I am so glad to see his name popping up more and more every week. That guy is amazing. I haven’t read that article, but surely will. He has a show on CNN called Global Public Square (GPS) which is usually very thought provoking. He also wrote a book called, “The Post-American World” which is pretty highly respected. He’s apparently a candidate for Obama’s foreign policy advisor which I think would be pretty amazing.
August 12, 2008 at 2:11 pm
YEha I do love fareed zakaria. i watch GPS a lot. my only beef with him is he always kind of seems a little smug. and like he’s tlaking down to people. but i think that might just be his foreign mannerisms. it’s ahrd sometimes with foreign people to understand tone, and inflection sometimes. As for baracks corruption level…it’s simply speculation obviously, but he’s fairly new to big time american politics. i mean he’s only been a senator. that’s about it. other than some smaller offices. so to go form a nobody in the democratic party to the democratic party canidate…he either sucked a lot of dick, or the party hand plucked him for being the least like bush, in which case yes he might not be ready to leave. I like barack as a person. and i can actually stand to watch him talk so thats a plus, but I think him and his supporters seem to be living in this dream world that he’s the messiah of the nation. Do you know how many times a president has run on the platform of reforming the government, and on change? almost everyone of them. and they rarely do it. Now some will argue barack is on the level of those people…but really how do you know? what has he ever done to prove that? I do think he’s the muc better choice over McCain, and obviously a step up form bush so i won’t be pissed if he gets it. but i just wish people would be more realistic with their expectations of him. he’s a politician…and on top of that he’s in a party that is notorious for playing politics and flip flopping. If you can give the republicans credit for anything it’s that they get things done. they do what they set out to do. now the decisions they make might not be the right ones, but they do at least do them. the Dem’s throughout history just kinda stand aorund and say.. we’re not republicans, and don’t do anything. especially know with the party split the way it is.
August 12, 2008 at 2:54 pm
M.A. makes some good points. Its interesting when I think about my college days, I actually had a political job in the Democratic system in Chicago working for the man himself, Richard J. Daley, the BIG DICK, not the little one who’s there now. It was really cool when I found out on my first day, that there were actually two people on the payroll for every one person eight hour shift. So I, and everyone else who worked in City Hall, only had to be there half the time. I thought this was really cool, that is, of course, unless you were a taxpayer. Man, I would think, people would really be pissed off if they knew how their tax dollars were being squandered.
August 12, 2008 at 2:59 pm
I think people are pissed about it… but there’s no way to do anything about it. sur eyou can vote for the guy who is going to CLAIM he will change the tax system. but once he’s in where’s his accountability? that’s the problem with the presidents now. there’s no accountability for thier actions. if they lie and get in and do nothing…what can we do? we can choose not to re-elect them…ouch (sarcasm) and even if they claim that they did change the tax system and the flow of taxes in the system how can we ever know? it’s impossible. we just have to take a liar’s word for it. it’s all messed up
August 12, 2008 at 3:41 pm
I wrote a letter into Esquire and they actually printed it. (The Issue with Colbert on the cover, on shelves now!) It was basically the same kind of topic. There is so much cynicism when thinking about politicians, that a lot of people won’t get on the Obama bandwagon. Basically, my point was: I’m a very cynical guy, but there comes a point where you DO just have to think someone might actually stand for something. For me, it’s Obama. If you just sit on the sidelines and claim everyone is lying and corrupt, what WILL convince you? Pretty much nothing. If you’re so set in your ways and you’re mind is made up, there’s no point to even TRYING to reach out to people. Sure, Obama MAY be full of shit, he might not mean it when he says, “I want to set up a system to keep politicians accountable for all their votes and actions” or maybe he’s misleading people when he says, “I want to get away from of using ‘Faith’ as a sword and ‘patriotism’ as a bludgeon” but at least he’s saying those things, you know? McCain doesn’t say those things. There’s no reason to be critical of the positivity until he actually DOES something to discredit it. Give the guy a chance at least, when he fucks up feel free to say “I told you so” but why shoot down a feeling of hope prematurely? I do agree that some people go way too far, but what would you call them? “Too Hopeful?” I think that’s better than being “too cynical” I guess it’s a choice between “potential disappointment” and “inherent disappointment” I don’t know, but lately I’ve just really embraced positive vibes wherever I can find em….Would someone have sex with Kelsey on the air please?
August 14, 2008 at 12:27 am
I agree with all that’s been said, but what about politics isn’t corrupt? I’ve been in a position now for awhile where I’ve got to see things from the inside, and I’ve been noticing all of the bullshit that goes on. The only way this country CAN turn things around is voting for the person that claims that he/she will turn things around. The constitution wasn’t written in anticipation of a country of skeptics and cynics. It was written for people who see what needs to be changed and want to change it. I think that the people that will change things and have the capacity to vote in change are the people who can realize that things are wrong and believe in change. The whole system is built around the hope for change. The men who wrote the consitution weren’t doing it on a whim. If those men were cynical and thinking that their idea of freedom(however biased it may have been) was just a pipedream, then our country would never have existed. I believe that Obama is the best candidate because he is the one person that has had the balls to admit that our country is fucked up and needs a change. Change cannot come in 4 years, our consitution is not built for that. The beauty of the document is that it slows down government so that the people in charge can’t change things with a stroke of a pen like George III of England did throughout the mid to late 18th century. The reason I like Barack is that he at least proposes to enact change. Conservatives like McCain, although not the conservative that the GOP wants, will not fight for change. I think that Obama symbolizes more than just a liberal mindset. He says that he wants to get in to change things around, and I think that this country needs it. Its a shame that we have fallen in international standing in areas like education, healthcare, and standard of living. What needs to be done? Not what has been done for the past 8 years. Corrupt as his rise may be, Obama is the best choice because I believe he will surround himself with people who aren’t just “yes men.” It’s sad that the American political system has come down to two parties, but the party that has historically enacted the most change is the “modern” Democratic party, dating back to FDR. Him, Kennedy, LBJ, and Clinton have at least tried to help out those in our country who are struggling. I think that Obama can change things for the better just like other Democrats before them. I agree that both parties are fucked up, believe me, I’ve seen it. But for a person to say “I hate all politicians and they don’t do anything for me so I won’t vote” is disgusting and goes against everything this country was made for and stands for. The only way countries have ever progressed is through change, and those who at least embrace change have a chance to enact change. So don’t think that the system is wrong. It’s merely those that want to stop change that harm our system. For our country to continue, we need a new voice, and if that voice seems to be inexperienced so be it. I’d rather take a new voice than one that recites the same rhetoric that has been going on for the past 50 years and has gotten us nowhere but where we are now…
August 14, 2008 at 2:27 pm
Amen, SDM.
August 15, 2008 at 9:29 am
It is absurd to think 98% of policy will change with Obama, or that 98% of anything will change, ever. 98% of water won’t change if you put it in a freezer. I would truly LOVE to live in a country that changed 98% of its rules every 4 years.
Drug, speeding, decency, ownership, & criminal laws are all pretty stable. Going to the DMV will still suck 8 years from now. Any minor alteration in the corporate tax structure demands long conversation and often quick revision. Most freedoms will remain. ‘Change’ doesn’t suggest that everything we do will simultaneously alter in fundamental ways.
Consider a list of 10 things where 3 are fucked up: should we all say ‘fuck it, the list sucks but it’s the only list we have’, or should we ‘change’ the 3 things that suck?
The argument that ‘what if our candidate doesn’t actually change things’ is silly. Assuming change is impossible, it is easy to say the candidate promoting ‘change’ is the wrong choice. But instead of suggesting impossible things, such as a war on (inanimate/undefined)’Terror’, Obama is campaigning to fix realistic problems.
“I’m not an economist, but I think we’re growing” ~George W. Bush
August 18, 2008 at 3:14 am
“I’d rather take a new voice than one that recites the same rhetoric that has been going on for the past 50 years and has gotten us nowhere but where we are now…”
There have been many candidates who’s platform for election was “change” in fact it’s pretty much every democrats slogan when trying to follow a republican. It’s what people want to hear. It does sound great, and yes obama might even try a little bit of change, but he’s promising the stars and the moon, when he more than likely won’t even try to build a spaceship. I believe every president tries to change the US when they are in office. So voting for someone just on the fact he claims he will change is like voting for a baseball player into the all-star game because he says he’s going to try to hit a homerun. And sticking with that analogy what has Obama done to deserve a vote into an allstar game? it’d be like voting in Jason Larue or scott speizio. they are cool dudes, and fun to have around but really have they ever preformed well enough to go in? no! has Obama done anything worthy of running a country other than be a celebrity? Not really. He’s voted in the senate opposite of his current views about 50% of the time, and is basically fairly new relatively. Does he have any military background? Nope he’s never even talked to a general until last month. and lets not forget we’re in a war. Now don’t try to pin me as a mccain supporter. I’m not at all. probably less so than i am obama actually. Just the topic leaned toward obama. I’m much more liberal in my views. My whole point which i’ve stated a few times is basically the only reason to really vote for obama is because he’s the opposite of bush. And buying into his political games is just as bad as the people who buy into Mccains or bush’s. Now the fact he isn’t bush is probably reaosn enough to vote for him actually. But I have a feeling people who are actually looking for this “change” of his in the next four or eight years will be sorely disappointed. But someone up there already pulled out the scapegoat obama supporters will use when he doesn’t actually do anything he said he would.. “it’s too hard to change things in 4 years” Everyone is so gung-ho about this change thing but i know after 4 years and Obama being EXACTLY like all the other mediocre politicians before him all his supporters will use that exact same excuse to justify him. So if change is so hard to do in 4 years…why promise it to everyone? again because it’s a good campaign strategy. hell he could use it for re-election if he makes it…”More change…4 years isn’t enough time” The economy and the countries success and happiness as a whole goes up and down. It’s not 100% bushes fault we are where we are today. hell it’s probably not even 30%. and the presidents who are in office when we bounce back will also have very very little to do with the countries success. there’s been maybe 2 presidents ever in the last 100 years who have actually made real change. and one of them did it by taking everything in the country and putting it under government control..which i promise won’t fly today. could you imagine how everyone would flip out if bush said I’m going to take control of all the banks, and roads, and police, and projects and I’m going to use them to fix all of our problems. people would flip. although doing that would probably help..
August 18, 2008 at 11:33 am
Perhaps you missed my point. My point wasn’t so much that Obama is promising change, it’s that he is change because he isn’t like the other politicians that have come before him. I also think that presidents make a lot of promises that they cannot and do not keep, but thats the nature of the office. He is only one man whose job is to enfore the laws that congress makes, so how can a lot of change come without drastic measures being taken such as those enancted in the first 100 days of FDR’s presidency. The reason I said that he would be a “new voice” isn’t because that new voice says that he will change things in healthcare, education, the normal shit. He isn’t someone that is looked at as being from inside the beltway. He is a Senator, yes, which is a pretty big political office, whether you are experienced or not. However, I think that his “inexperience” is a positive thing in this race for president. No one is going to run on the platform of “My hands are tied when I get in there from day one so vote for me because I will sit in the oval office and feel unmotivated because my job title doesn’t let me make laws.” Of course EVERY presidential candidate is going to make loose promises to get votes, how do you think that every office in this nation, from County Assessor to President of the US, is won? Not on reality, not on cynical comments about how nothing is done. Voters don’t want to hear that, so Obama’s will be like others before him, its just how much you believe in his promises.
MA, you said that nothing gets done and people promise the same things over and over again to get votes, which is true, but I’m asking how should that trend be bucked? What would you like a Presidential candidate to say? If you were Obama’s campaign manager, or if you were running yourself, what would your message be? I just don’t know if there is anything else someone can say besides “I will change things.”
And promising the moon and stars sounds good, and thats the only thing that matters until Nov 4th. I think that being a celebrity and making crazy promises is an interesting political move. Obama’s PR is great. Doesn’t matter why people seem to like you, just keep playing into their interests so that they vote for you. After that its your job to do. It might sound like a Simpsons episode, but its how things are done in this country. So the new voice I was talking about was just a reference to the fact that Obama isn’t a White, 65 year old man that has been in Congress for the past 30 years. My point was that maybe this country needs someone who is new to it all in order to change how things are done.
August 18, 2008 at 3:46 pm
I do agree Obama is different. and that is his one strength. Other countries like him too. That is actually a major reason why i would vote for him. the image he would bring to the white house and to america. without even being a diplomat, he will be helping our foreign policy with his celebrity. Doesn’t make him a good politician, just makes him a good product. and I guess thats what i see Obama as. Just a good product. And i agree with you on some things. if you see obama as just another politician who like hads hollow promises, but he’s the best one out there giving hollow promises, then yes by all means vote for him and discuss him. but if you’re preaching him as the jesus christ of presidents then save your breath on me. In response to your 2nd part, I’d love to be able to run an honest campaign. i’d love to be 100% blunt. kind of like robin williams in that one really dumb movies kind of based on jon stewart running for president. I’d liek tot ell people…hey I won’t be able to change much, but i am going to work my ass off to make politics more honest, and you can rest asure that the presidential office will be an honest one. This is what I believe and I will work my hardest to do it. Then I would actually try to do everything i said i would. BUT i wouldn’t be able to run on that. Bluntness, and honesty get you no where in politics. which is sad. Which again is the only strength I think bush had. He did everything he said he would do. no what he said he would do was the wrong choice, and he lied to get it done. But he did stick with everything he said he would. he didn’t flip flop even once.
August 18, 2008 at 4:18 pm
http://www.50bushflipflops.com
August 18, 2008 at 5:34 pm
yeah most of those are very very nit-picky. they are just taking out of context quotes and pairing them up on pretty non important issues. also all of them were after he was already elected. I was refering to saying you’ll do one thing to get elected and then not doing them once elected. Plus there’s a difference between flip flopping and just straight up lying. bush lied. He said there were WMD’s when there wasn’t. and a lot of that sites flip flops are lies. Flip flops to me means you support a specific topic, then you vote or change your mind to the opposite after. like Barrack Obama has done numerous times on several things. One of the more recent ones was the bill the president brought to the senate about wire tapping phones, and giving the patriot act more freedom. Barack Obama Voted yes in agreement with the president then 2 days later made a statement telling people that that exact bill will be one of the first things he will fight to abolish when he’s president. He doesn’t bow to special interests my ass
August 19, 2008 at 10:05 am
I went to see “Swing Vote” last week, and thought it was actually pretty funny. The movie really makes fun of the Democratic and Republican parties. It has them going to extreme opposite positions as they try to win the vote of just one man (Kevin Kostner), who happens to be a loser and drunk. It does end on a serious note, though, and makes a poignant statement about politics in this country.
August 19, 2008 at 2:39 pm
yeah i thought that movie kind of looked clever
August 19, 2008 at 7:00 pm
http://www.cnn.com/2008/POLITICS/08/18/cafferty.mccain/index.html
The above link puts it so well. I have said to McCain supporters that I just think Obama is more thoughtful and more of a free-thinking man. I mean, maybe he broadens his views to gain appeal, (a fact that really has lowered my opinion of him quite a bit) but he’s still SO much different than what we typically see. Sure, he’s drifted more into the routine, but America is so dumb guys, 1 out of 8 people still think he’s a secret Muslim. When he DOES say forward-thinking and very true things (people in the mid-west cling to guns and religion) he gets hammered. Although, I have a hard time putting into words why I don’t like McCain when he speaks, I think that little article says it all.
I am a little bit saddened by the fact that I think a lot of my own views are more progressive than either candidate: Let gays marry, legalize drugs, simplify taxes, allow private versions of nearly all government programs, limit police power, stop policing the world and feed EVERY American instead, instead of catering to Evangelicals-challenge them, end military contracting, end the Iraq war immediately, disarm the progressive world of nukes (probably harder than I think, obviously) make education valued again, etc. ….and I’m just a college drop-out from Missouri, but what can you do?
August 20, 2008 at 3:30 am
well you are an idealist to a T greg. You are right if everyone agreed to all those things the world would be perfect. but the world isn’t that black and white. none of those things would help america if we just decided to enact them. there’s to many things to consider that most idealist dont consider. You are right though. In a perfect world thinking in absolutes would work. but then again bush thought in absolutes and it didn’t work. but his absoultes were different than yours. therefore he’s a liar and a terrible president. the problem is we all think in absolutes. we need to all think more in a gray area and we’d be great. I think that’s my problem. I don’t take a stance on much. i can argue a very strong argument as to why gay’s shouldn’t be allowed to marry. a VERY stong argument. I can also argue why guns, and god are a great thing to base our countries laws off…and i don’t even believe in god….it’s all too comp[licated for any of us to actually fixe. so we cater to the majority. right now the majority is ignorant….it has been for years and years. and it’s sad. but it’s brought us to this…to a government and is incapable of producing a candidate that is worthy of a single vote. so we’re left to vote for faggot ass douchebags like clinton, busch, gore, obama, bush JR and mccain. we need a complete overhaul
August 20, 2008 at 9:13 am
I just read Cafferty’s blog about McCain, and I agree with him 100%. At his appearance at the Saddleback church last Saturday, when asked about his biggest moral failing, McCain’s response was “The failure of my first marriage”. Really? Why was it a failure? He didn’t happen to mention that his first wife was in a car accident while he was in Viet Nam, leaving her in a wheel chair. Still married to her, he met Cindy, rich, good looking, and eighteen years his junior. He dropped his wife like a hot potato, and hooked up with Cindy. Let’s see, I think there’s a word for this. Oh yeah, ADULTERY. Why couldn’t he just have said, “My biggest moral failing was my committing adultery”? I think all those Bible thumpers in the audience would have understood that word. Point two, when asked who were the three wisest people he would confer with as President, the first person he mentioned was General Patraeus. WOW! Shouldn’t that make every intellegent person be afraid, be very, very afraid? Point three, I actually agree with McCain on this one: I really believe that he should follow bin Laden to the gates of hell. But he should have Cindy pack him some extra clothes, it may be a long trip. I remember Bush saying something very similar some four or five years ago. (A statement, I’m sure, he felt would help get him re-elected).
August 20, 2008 at 9:54 am
One more thing, I know that Keith Olbermann goes over the top sometimes, but I really liked his “Special Comment” about McCain from Monday night, that’s on his website. He really chastised McCain for a lot of his ill-mannered remarks about Obama. His ending statement was “Senator McCain, grow up!” I couldn’t have said it better. And again, about Jack Cafferty’s comments on McCain, Jack was criticized yesterday by some guy named Harvey Kushner from HumanEvents.com. This guy compared Cafferty to Hitler’s propaganda minister. Olbermann came to Jack’s defense by ripping on this Kushner dude. He concluded that according to Kushner, everything negative that comes out about McCain can be traced to some Nazi conspiracy. I just enjoy hearing him ripping on some dude who’s an obvious asshole.
August 20, 2008 at 10:45 am
Well I think an Idealist is what we need. Not someone who says “In a perfect country THESE would be the things we do, but these things are too hard to accomplish, so instead I’m just gonna go on vacation for 2/3rd of my presidency.” Instead of just sitting back and saying “it’s too complicated to fix” why not put a little faith in a guy who says he wants to work his ass off to TRY. The guy who says we need a “complete overhaul” just like you do? I mean, yeah it would be really fucking hard to fix a lot of these problems, but why do we expect so little from a president? It SHOULD be a pretty hard job. Sure, I know Obama wont fix EVERYTHING, but I’d rather support for a guy who at least agrees that things need fixing, and can’t fix everything vs. a guy who thinks the last eight years have been “pretty good”-McCain. I mean what can you say? The people aren’t ready for those things? Well the people in charge make the policy, and I think people would adjust. I don’t think evangelical conservatives are as big and important as people think. So important that they get their own Pastor moderated forum? Well 16% of Americans claim to be Atheist or Agnostic, but Blacks are only 13% of America and Hispanics are only 15%. Maybe a candidate should be bold enough to say “You know? I’m not so sure of my faith, because who knows what happens, and what’s real?” instead of sucking off the race groups.
And what is your case against gay marriage? I’d love to hear it. I see the angle of being married in the church, obviously. Although, we have drive-in chapels in Vegas which seem a little more damaging to the “sacrament” than 2 gay dudes who actually take it seriously and love each other. I can’t see any reason why they shouldn’t be able to legally marry. I hope you don’t plan on giving the argument for “marriage abuse” because that’s the sad paranoia that shapes the policies I hate the most.
August 21, 2008 at 10:59 am
Just in case anyone missed it, McCain, while speaking in New Mexico the other day, was aked by a woman in the audience, “How can we follow Bin Laden to the gates of hell unless we bring back the draft”? McCain’s response was, “I don’t disagree with anything you just said”. Olbermann showed this on “Countdown” last night. His statement was that if McCain would in any way consider bringing back the draft, he’s not just dangerous, “he’s damn dangerous”. I totally agree, and I’ve been saying that this guy is dangerous for quite awhile. All you have to do listen to his words and read between the lines. Anyone under 30 who is considering voting for this guy might as well join up now, and make plans for the next flight to Iraq, or maybe Iran, or maybe even Russia. This is some serious shit.
August 21, 2008 at 11:56 am
30 Comments! (now 31) a new FitzPhone record. Granted it’s the same 5 people, but hey, slow and steady.
August 21, 2008 at 12:08 pm
Isn’t it weird that a nation’s GDP and a nation’s Olympic Medal count are so closely related?
That makes Michael Phelps like Bill Gates. And Haiti is well,.. Haiti.
August 21, 2008 at 9:46 pm
I saw that Haiti actually took gold in the competition to light tire-fires in the streets for a riot competition…those haitians and their riots…what a cute bunch of rebels
August 22, 2008 at 8:19 am
So last night, my wife, Mrs. Naked and I sat down and went through all of our legal papers, trying to determine exactly how many houses we owned, you know, just in case somebody asked us. We wouldn’t want to look like fucking idiots, or worse yet, senile fucking idiots.
August 23, 2008 at 1:48 am
I heard from my friend who is an officer in the marines that there’s a “ridiculously great chance” that if we keep pressuring Iran like we are that they are going to attack isreal just to piss us off. Kind of forcing our hands since Isreal is an alley, and then Making us even more hated by all the muslim countries for supporting the jewish nation and basically putting us at war with the entire middle east, and reversing anything we’ve done in Iraq. I hyope if Obama gets elected he flip flops and keeps our troops there ebcause we’re going to be needing all those military bases we have set up to start invading everyone from Qutar to turkey
August 23, 2008 at 2:02 am
oh and if you didn’t hear obama in a not surprising move picked the vice president that looks, sounds, and acts (and is the closest in age) to mccain. Biden. Gotta love politics and painting a wonderful Figurehead for us all to have hope in, and blame when things go wrong.
August 23, 2008 at 9:19 am
Still waiting for that anti-gay marriage argument……
August 23, 2008 at 10:41 am
Ah yeah I’ll get to it today. By the way I am pro-gay marriage. But i can just argue either side of most points.
August 23, 2008 at 11:15 am
Well aren’t you highly skilled. Most people have the ability to see both sides, they just take a stance. Come on now. You just said you have a REALLY good argument against it, and I consider it a modern day civil rights disaster….so I’m rather curious.
August 24, 2008 at 2:36 am
nah not highly skilled at all. I just like debate. I’m kind of buddist in the sense I believe in the middle way. not being too far to the left or right. not thinking in absolutes. and no i’m not claiming to be spiritual or buddist actually. probably just lazy. but as soon as you take a very clear cut stance on something and refuse to accept other people’s stances you begin to bread ignorance and anger and you wind up in wars or fist fights depending on the topic and the celebrity of the person saying it. no I do think on some things you can take a clear cut stance. Like murder, and various serious things like that. but saying things like Mccain is a terrible decision and Obama is the obsious right choice is just as ignorant as saying Catholics are the obvious right religion and Jews have no fucking clue what they are saying. Mcaina has GREAT atributes as does obama. I think this is another case like many elections before it where it doesn’t matter who you vote for. that’s what this country’s politics have become. there’s been maybe 2 elections in the last 100 years where there was an obvious right choice.
August 24, 2008 at 10:23 am
I really just want to hear this REALLY good argument against gays getting married, but you keep stalling.
August 24, 2008 at 7:36 pm
I think that McCain does have some positive attributes…but I also think that he is a bad choice for President of this country. What’s wrong with saying that? Like it or not politics is something in this country where you are obligated to make a clear cut decision…either for something or against it in most cases, and voting for President is just another example. There can’t be a middle of road, and the thought of Obama and McCain getting together to make a hybrid is just fucking sick.
And here’s MY argument against gays getting married. God hates it, the government doesn’t want it, it will ruin our economy, I want to keep my guns, and gays love abortion. What more do you want Fitz? Some crap about them having feelings? God’s already commented on that…and his word is final…so gays don’t really count..
August 24, 2008 at 7:37 pm
And on an unrelated note…what do you think about Biden being the pick for VP for the Dems? Any thoughts on that Fitz?…
August 25, 2008 at 12:26 am
I like Biden. I think he completely quells McCain’s “experience” and he has no qualms with sticking it to McCain while Obama stays high-brow. I don’t know who he could pick that can out-debate Biden. Also, there’s a “safe old white guy” on the ticket now. Some say it hurts the “change” issue, but I think Biden is a pretty bold, straight talking, no bullshit guy. Which isn’t something I’VE seen in a while….I’m hoping that Biden puts some bite in Obama’s bark. Since the primaries he’s been a huge pussy, and he doesn’t take the bold stances he used to. Some say candidates have to “drift to the middle” but people were SO excited about Obama and I think it was because of the power and boldness of his words. It was BECAUSE he was a very liberal guy, and a very liberal guy that appeals to the people who haven’t had a candidate in a fucking while. It seems that since he started pumping the brakes, so hid the enthusiasm. I think teaming up with Biden will help him talk a little tougher. Maybe stop being afraid to be a liberal, because I think there are a lot more votes in that group then either campaign believes. What do you think?
August 25, 2008 at 6:59 am
I would vote for Biden before I’d vote for Obama…there one bold statement…here’s the 2nd….McCain WILL win the election in November.
here’s the reason why….the main driving force of obama’s celebrity is -26 voters. the young crowd. Mccain’s major base is the 50+ crowd. inbetween that they split it pretty close. BUT you can rely on the 50+ crowd to actually be out there voting. when it comes to our genration, and people our age voting…you can rely on maybe 50% of us. the other 50% won’t vote because their favorite bar has 2 dollar drafts that day. and sadly yes that is true…maybe not 50% but a lot of our aged voters will be registered and won’t vote because they are getting blow jobs and dont feel like waiting in line. 50+ voters have nothing better to do but work and vote. and that’s fine with me. My life WILL NOT change no matter if McCain or Obama get elected. which is exactly why I’m not even registered to vote.(oh yeah did I not mention that fact yet?) as far as gay marriage goes…It’s a lot to type and i’m lazy but here’s a preview of the argument…Why can’t I marry my pet monkey? he fucks me, I fuck him, and we are in love….? Bold again? or just ridiculous? actually both. where do we draw the line?
August 25, 2008 at 9:03 am
M.A. makes one good point. Historically, the electorate under the age of 26 have a very poor showing when it comes to the percentage who actually vote in presidential elections. Overall, the 2004 election had a turnout of just over 60% of the electorate (those who can vote). And this was the highest percentage turnout sinse 1968, when the Viet Nam war was tearing this country apart. Its amazing when you realize that the 40% who didn’t vote could be a formidable force if they could ever get organized and passionate about a candidate. But, I do believe that this election will be different. I think that Obama has energized a significant portion of this under 26 age group. Look at the 2004 election, even a dick like John Kerry got 48.3% of the vote. Bush won the election by the slimest of margins. And once the debates between McCain and Obama start, I think that a lot of McCain’s fuckups will be exposed. Confusing the Sunni and Shiite, mistakenly refering to the Iraq Afganistan border (there’s a country called Iran in there dickhead, you know, the one you want to bomb), not knowing how many houses he owns, and many more. He is not going to be given a free pass on these fuckups during the debates, as he has for the most part up till now. We can’t just say anymore, “oh well, he’s old, give him a break”. This guy actually wants to be President. Anyone in their 20’s better wake up and realize that if McCain does become President, it definitely will affect your lives, in ways you can’t even imagine.
August 25, 2008 at 10:32 am
I think Mark Aaron is wrong on almost all those statements….The candidate who has set several records in fundraising and primary voter turn out is not going to lose the general election. Sure, young people don’t vote….but I don’t know ANYONE who would vote in the primary and not in the general, and he won that just fine so….but what I was really concerned with was gay marriage, and you seemed really proud of “knowing the other side” and you say “Why can’t I marry a monkey?” What does that even mean? That’s the most uneducated, right-wing black/white fear argument ever. (I say that because I’ve heard it before a lot) It’s like “If we let GAY people marry….WHERE DOS IT END!?” and then stupid Americans freak out and think “YEAH! were DOES it end? Straights only!” That’s like saying when blacks had to use different water fountains people would think “Well what if animals start using our water fountains?” You ask “Were does it end?” couldn’t we agree that it ends with HUMAN BEINGS. There IS a distinction between people who can recite their vows and a goddamn animal. And I know you’re even pro gay marriage, but it’s the the fact that usually instead of an opinion, you just write about how good you are at seeing both sides. And yes, I am not much of a middle-of-the-road guy on a LOT of subjects, but there comes to be a point where someone has to say “THIS ISN’T WORTH DEBATING” and to me, gay marriage is maybe the biggest of those issues. Can’t people see that it’s the biggest civil rights disaster of our time? That and letting openly gay people serve. It’s the last blatant form of discrimination left. Let’s PROGRESS our country a little bit. I think it’s insanely sad that BOTH candidates are against/afraid-to-say they would open those “flood gates” I mean, marriage isn’t even a real thing. It’s a man-made “status” for a relationship that doesn’t mean anything. If it weren’t for tax manipulation I would say that people SHOULD be able to marry Animals, bowling balls, computers, themselves, whatever the hell they want. Why are people so concerned with what everyone else is doing? Why would you put the smallest amount of energy into limiting someone else’s happiness when it doesn’t effect you? I believe in the Pursuit of Happiness, with no limitations other than you can’t interfere with someone else’s pursuit. No murder, rape, or stealing. Other than that, who really gives a fuck? Discrimination and fear are PRIMITIVE motives, why do we latch on to such bullshit in 2008…..
August 25, 2008 at 12:16 pm
I remember reading awhile ago where a man, I think in Europe somewhere, actually married his bowling ball. But later, sued for divorce. After a contentious divorce proceeding, the ball lost, and now sits, used and abused, on a rack somewhere in a bowling alley in Istanbul.
August 25, 2008 at 1:46 pm
Better to have loved and lost, then never loved at all, I say…..
August 25, 2008 at 11:44 pm
yeah…the whole gay marriage thing is sad. I don’t understand why people are so hateful towards gays. So what??…its a dude that likes dudes instead of chicks. Is that so bad? Am I really at risk of being murdered or having my car stolen if Joe marries Bill? If they like the meat let em eat meat damn it. It doesn’t affect me in the least bit. Who are gays harming by wearing wedding rings? No one. I don’t know how you can argue against that…unless you have a secret gay crush on a dude that is about to get married and you are upset about it. And forget the bullshit “cause the Lord said so” argument. Thats such shit. If God is who people say he is then he would love gays just as much as straight people, end of story….so why aren’t we letting them marry? Who the fuck knows.
Anyway, I think Biden is a great choice for VP and here’s why. He is a white, middle aged, male, with a lot of experience and he is not afraid to talk tough. I’ve said since the day Obama was the sure choice that he had to pick a strong, white, male candidate for VP. Why? Because there are a ton of people out there that are thinking…well if only Obama was white. If only he wasn’t Muslim. If only he didn’t have such a funny sounding name. You know who is white, not Muslim, and has a Joe Schmoe kind of sounding name? Joe Biden. Now those podunk Democrats that were afraid of Obama might rest a little easier, because Biden being next to Obama brings comfort to people who see Obama as too different. I think of it as kind of tieing down the Obama image. He can be, and has been I think, ridiculed for being too hopeful and head in the clouds-ish. No matter what his views are, having a white-haired white man next to Obama that looks like he could be anyone’s neighbor bolsters Obama’s image A LOT politically.
And another thing. I don’t know if you can say that McCain will win FOR SURE. Yeah the voters that are above 50 vote more than our age demographic, but you have to take into account the other factors that are going on in this country. Bush has a 30 percent approval rating, the dollar has fallen a lot, leading to a whole mess of things economically, and we are still in a war that people are growing tired of more and more. Putting all of those factors together makes it the party that is not in office’s election to lose. People voted for Bush because he was change after Clinton, and this time will not be an exception. The economy is down, the middle class is hurting, healthcare is a HUGE issue, gas is a HUGE issue, and the party that represents the upper class is most at risk to lose. All the Dems have to do is portray the Republicans as the party that doesn’t care as much because their candidate has 7 houses, and they win. People are stupid in this country, and they are easily manipulated.
I think that Obama will win because he represents a change from the past 8 years that now close to 70 percent of people see as a failure. McCain can try his hardest to distance himself from Bush, but they both still have that (R) next to their name, and that hurts this election cycle. So I think that while the over 50 crowd will still vote in higher numbers, they will lean more to the left this election than they have for the past 2 Presidential cycles, and Obama will win. Given all of the components that can be entered in as determining factors, Obama just has to keep up what he is doing and he will probably win by 2 or 3 points, which is a lot in today’s Presidential races.
August 26, 2008 at 7:23 am
you’re right about the monkey thing. it is people…but my point was I can’t marry a monkey for evolution reasons. there’s no intent or chance for procreation. Now from a civil rights standpoint saying that gay’s deserve the same rights as married couples makes sense, but then we’re discriminating single people. just because you’re living with someone and having sex why should that allow you to get tax breaks? Because it shows good moral values. and then it goes back to religion unfortunately. According to the moral majority being gay is immoral. And let me stress again I DON’T agree with that. But also unfortunately morals are decided by a majority. A countries morals are just based off of how the majority of people see the issue. So if we can marry the same sex because they are in love, and deserve tax breaks like the married couples, then why can’t someone marry their sister just to get a tax break, or why can’t someone marry their mentally retarded neighbor. and no that wasn’t just for shock value, it was a seirous point. Someone with a major level of retardation can still understand marriage and say vows but the can’t get married…they can’t recieve tax breaks. SO yes it does kind of come down to where should it end and whats the real issue? is it taxes, is it love, is it civil rights? TO be married you’re supposed to be of sound mind and body. Now i think the bigger issue is how any straight couple can get married, when half of them don’t fit those categories. a completely psycho serial killer can get married. his mind is so fucked he shouldnt be allowed to leave his house…And lot of people would argue gay’s aren’t of sound mind. And there is technically an argument for that too. The majority of people who are gay are gay because of a brain mutation. the others who are gay usually are gay because of achildhood psychology issue. there for no gay person could technically be considered in sound mind therefore they shouldn’t be allowed ot get a marriage license anyway. Now again anyhting I’m saying should be taken as a debate class subject nto my actual personal views
August 26, 2008 at 10:14 am
I understand you’re playing Devil’s Advocate, but for every major issue there can be a small hang up, but that’s this countries problem. Our government worries too much about the Lowest Common Denominator and not enough about people who have common sense and can maintain their lives with personal responsibility. Just because SOME people can’t handle something, doesn’t mean it should be outlawed for those who can. (Drugs, Prostitution, Speed Limits, Non-traditional marriages, etc) Progress means giving people more responsibility for themselves and less “policing.” Like parents raising kids: If you don’t let people do anything, they’ll just stay stupid and useless…which is probably what our government wants anyway. There isn’t just one path through this life and sometimes parents, schools, governments try to put people on “the right” path and I think everyone should just worry about their own journey and stop staring at everyone thinking “Oh, what’s that guy tryin to do? I don’t know if I like that”
August 27, 2008 at 8:10 am
well the problem with that is most of the country is the lowest common denominator. The majority of the country couldn’t responisbly smoke marijuana, or drive a safe speed. And if we said ok well we’ll let everyone do whatever they want and choose their own journey, then that affects other people’s journey’s as well. I’m late to work because some kid who is already as dumb and slow as a turtle also guy high as balls that morning and takes forever and screws up my order at the mcdonalds drive through. Now I’m speeding through the city cutting people off and barely missing the baby crossing the street. I know that was a very weak point but that was actually kind of the point of it. If i’m allowed to speed as much as i want, and dumbass kids are getting high as balls everyday little things like that become big things quickly. Not that those things don’t happen sometimes, but they happen a lot less than they would if we just gave people free reign. then you have people driving 12 beers and racing down a highway killing themselves and a family in a minivan. I might be missing your point but if saying we should be lax on more laws such as speeding, drugs, and prostitution I disagree 100%. Now Gay-marriage yes I think we as a country could handle that. but the MAIN reason politically it’s not going to happen yet is because of taxes. if gay people got married the amount of money the government would lose because of tax breaks would double. Now morally there’s no issue. they deserve the tax cuts just like I do as a straight man. But politically and economically it’s a disaster. especially to the republicans. Republicans very rarely like to raise taxes (because they think roads magically build themselves, and they don’t care our schools are producing president bush level educations) So if they are dolling out giant tax cuts to the hundreds of thousands of gay couples that will be getting married where are they supposed to get the money? they won’t raise the taxes, they definitely won’t be relaxing on the tax cuts they give all their big oil companies. so don’t count on that. Lets say a Dem gets in and decides he’s going to allow gay marriages…it’s still so complicated that just saying yes would likely cause enough damage for even some gay people do want to make it illegal again. It would be a very very VERY tricky thing to implement. Now it is possible. the same arguments have been made in every civil rights case, women, blacks, all of them. and we pulled those off eventually. BUT those had MAJOR support. with gay marriages there are just too many Christians in the USA. And that’s ok because we are (contrary to whether or not it please me and you fitz) a country based around Christianity. and that WILL NOT ever change. SO the support just won’t ever be there to make the government change things. Now with blacks and women that was a fear based on bigotry, but neither of those bigotries were based on religion. no one ever said slaves were ok because the bible says so (even though it does have guidelines for getting and keeping slaves) Those were beliefs based on tradition and old world politics. so with a few generations of education and awareness…they were overturned to make the majority fight for their rights. with gays… we’ve had generations of very open sexuality and gay-ness. and there has been little if any progress. Education alone won’t change this. you’d have to actually take on the church to change this one. And taking on the church is something I’d love to be a part of. We will not see a legalized civil union or marriage bill for gays passed in my lifetime in this country. If it’s that important of an issue you literally would have to move to another country. And that’s not a stab at you at all, I’m just saying that it’s an unfortunate sacrifice we have to make to live in such an amazing country. there’s many others we all make too. ones that even effect us more directly than gay marriage, but for everything our country has done wrong in my lifetime it’s given back 10 fold.
August 27, 2008 at 8:15 am
After re-reading that, which I should have done before I posted, I caught a thousand grammar and spelling mistakes. I apologize for that. I’ll start proofreading my stuff, but I get on a roll and just don’t stop typing and hit send before I think.
August 27, 2008 at 9:47 am
Laws cannot prevent people from making ‘dangerous’ choices. Walking down a dark alley in a rough neighborhood, having your child play rugby or American football, driving aimlessly, or operating heavy machinery on little sleep and a caffeine kick are ‘dangerous’ choices to make. They are also legal.
Marijuana, or so the argument goes, is so unreasonably dangerous that no sane adult could ever choose to smoke in the privacy of their home. Without drawing obvious parallels to alcohol or prescription medicine legality, it is not a stretch to believe that marijuana in fact is not so dangerous. If marijuana was decriminalized, it does not then mean that being high at your job would be legalized. Poor job performance will be handled reasonably, regardless of the cause.
Gay marriage and marijuana decriminalization actually meet at a conceptual level. There are people who find each individually unconscionable and there are people who find each perfectly decent. They are usually the same people on each side. So the way both these issues have started to change is by allowing state-level judgment on their legality.
We are one country, but we are many groups of people believing many contradictory things. Since you can’t have an individual government tailored for each person, we instead compromise on the best government for the greatest amount of people. If marijuana decriminalization and gay marriage are out of reach at a federal level (avoiding disenfranchising large groups with similar beliefs), then the compromise is allowing states to determine their legality. That way each group can relocate to where people agree with them, and at the same time receive equal bundles of goods from the government.
August 27, 2008 at 10:55 am
What’s interesting to note is that for most of the late 1800’s and very early 1900’s, marijuana and cocaine were perfectly legal and commonly prescribed by physicians and pharmacists in this country as pain relievers. It wasn’t until the FDA really came into it’s own in 1906 that these drugs were declared illegal. A lot of this, I am told, had to do with the fact that these drugs in particular were associated with blacks. It was felt that they contributed to blacks being shiftless and unreliable, and therefore, must be harmful.
August 27, 2008 at 12:34 pm
If, as M.A. suggests, there are hundreds of thousands, maybe even millions of gays running around our country, a predominantly christian country, then I think we need to place blame where it belongs…with God. Apparently, God is not paying attention. Why else would He be letting all these homos be born? Is He purposely messing with the X and Y chromosomes in fetuses just to fuck with us? I mean, this is getting ridiculous. When I dropped my car keys on the street the other day, I had to vigilantly look all around before I bent down to pick them up, lest some gay guy lurking in the shadows accost from behind. Like I said, either God is just not paying attention, or He is just fucking with us and laughing His ass off at the expense of us straight people. Either way, I have had just about enough.
August 27, 2008 at 5:36 pm
i couldn’t tell how much of that post was sarcasm…but if you’re trying to claim that there’s not hundreds of thousands of gay people in america you’re right. There’s between 4 and 6 million. And that’s just gays who are actually admitting to being gay. i’m sure ther3e’s a few million more out there. As for god dropping the ball? I think that’s where your post is sarcastic. but again I might be missing the point.
August 28, 2008 at 8:39 am
I was basically poking fun at homophobics in general who believe that just because homosexuals represent a small minority, maybe 2 or 3 percent of the population, they should somehow be deprived of the same basic rights as any other citizen in this country. As far as God playing a part, I just threw that in because it’s the religious right who use God as justification to discriminate against gays. They contend that homosexuality for some reason, goes against God. Therefore, we are right with God when we deny gays their basic civil rights. If you don’t use this God argument, which any logically thinking person would recognize as total bullshit, then you really have no basis for discriminating against gays. Just because you don’t particularly like or agree with their lifestyle is not a reason to deny gays their civil liberties.
August 28, 2008 at 9:15 am
Just thinking about this brought back memories of when I used to work in City Hall in Chicago. Couples would have to come in to get their marriage licenses. Every so often, a racially mixed couple would come in, and as they walked down the long corridor of City Hall, they would invariably get the “stare down” from my fellow employees. All I could do was shake my head and think to myself, “you pathetic morons”. Why in the hell these idiots would even care about someone else’s personal life is beyond me. But look, what if we, as good moral people, passed a law that made inter-racial marriages illegal. We could make a good case for it. It’s just unnatural, it goes against nature, so it must be wrong. Think of the millions of dollars that could have been saved in benefits and taxes if we had passed this law years ago. How ridiculous.
Personally, what bothers me more are little people. You know, little people with normal size people. What’s even worse is porn with little people and normal size people, like Mini Me and his former girl friend. After about the tenth or eleventh time, this video was really starting to creep me out.
August 28, 2008 at 9:23 am
Yeah, think of all the tax revenue we could save by banning inter racial marriage.
August 29, 2008 at 6:21 am
actually the bible states very clear that gay marriage, and interracial marriage are WRONG. but it also says any man who has sex with his wife on her period should be put to death, and that women should be put in jail for a few years if a man even thinks she has considered cheating. he doesn’t even need proof. and lets not forget the part where it says that having sex with anyone in your family is a sin punishable by death yet claims all of the human race was created by 1 man and 1 one with 2 sons….thats the most baffling thing I’ve ever heard. i hate anyone who reads the bible and believes. yet i read the bible at least a few times a week. i fyou have half a brain and can pick out the point of the stories it really does give you a good guideline to live by.
October 11, 2008 at 10:48 pm
Niggas admit Rachel Starr is the hottest hoe alive. I’m a chick and i know it!
November 12, 2008 at 7:44 pm
i25h37vmb9by587i
January 8, 2009 at 9:47 pm
hi
7pxc279doxivk0he
good luck