Charming…

Advertisements

93 Comments

Filed under Media, Wingnuts

93 responses to “Charming…

  1. Brent Fullard

    Jane Taber. of the Glib and Malice, is desperate for any angle she can spin against the Liberals, even one’s as thinly disguised as this .

    Oh sorry, the story is only about Christmas cards.

    Right.

  2. sassy

    So the point of Jane’s post is what exactly?

  3. Jay

    I wonder if Baird did one would the same hate be spewed or would they refrain. But then again, Baird has never come out in any definite way. I see him regularly at Woody’s Bar in the gay Village here in Toronto. He is usually with a friend of his and no one pays any attention to them except for a few self hating gays. One of which I went on a date with last year. It didn’t go any further than a date because the guy got into a climate change tirade where he supposedly knew more with his high school diploma and right wing internet propaganda videos than I did with My BSc And MSc in environmental science and 10 years experience in the field (including Toronto’s climate change plans)”.

    The internet is turning out to be a bad thing. Complete douchebags can now find each other and organize to spread their doucheness. In my opinion its why we are basically threading water and staying in the same spot we were in 2000 when it comes to many ongoing global issues.

  4. Ti-Guy

    So the point of Jane’s post is what exactly?

    Good question.

    I’ve said it before…the em-ess-em should can all of this user-generated content chock-a-block with “interactivity.” It’s a waste of time and brings on the creepy feeling I get too often that there is indeed a media conspiracy to convince the rest of us that we’re surrounded by raging lunatics.

  5. CWTF

    I wonder if Baird did one would the same hate be spewed or would they refrain.
    I was going to write something similar…

    Nice to see that the Globe had the good sense to disable comments but it is extremely sad to see that they had to do that.

    I’m guessing that most negative comments came from Conservative supporters…

  6. knb

    For what it is worth, the media have been sharing X-Mas cards they are receiving since the holidays began. I’m no Taber fan, but this column is a quasi gossip on the Hill affair and I don’t think she was up to anything nefarious.

    This is beyond sad and ridiculous in this day and age in Canada (at anytime of course, but you get my drift), to see this form of hatred so easily expressed.

    As sad as it is, kudos to the editor for putting a stop to it.

    BTW, I think the photo is terrific.

  7. Roll Tide

    Nothing wrong with the picture. We have all different family types now a days.

  8. MWW

    Whaaaa – Angry McPointy is gay?

  9. Lyn

    Well, Taber could have used a different title

    “Canadian Gothic or Brokeback Brisons?”

    Of course it would lead to some nasty comments and she should know better.

    Actually the card is really nice and kudos to the photographer

  10. Ti-Guy

    Whaaaa – Angry McPointy is gay?

    Where have you been?

  11. quite the scenery in the background. i’ve criticized brison in the past, but anyone with a golden lab/retriever is ok in my books 😉

  12. Beautiful pic. Photographer got the perfect color mix and backdrop. Nice dog.

    Scott’s a great guy. Have had the good fortune of sharing a beer or two over a BBQ. He was at the Calgary Stampede for a Liberal Pancake Breakfast (and the Hays Breakfast – the original Stampede Breakfast – but don’t tell any Conservative that… lol…) a few years ago too.

  13. billg

    I haven’t figured out which was more enjoyable, the picture or Jay’s dating story.

  14. You have to know that somewhere, there’s a homophobic conservative thinking “What! They’re allowed to own dogs?”

  15. Brent Fullard

    CWTF said:

    “Nice to see that the Globe had the good sense to disable comments but it is extremely sad to see that they had to do that.”

    That is an assumption on your part about the reason behind why the Globe deleted the chance to comment, I suspect a good deal of the comments they had received were directed at Jane Taber herself for this tasteless preoccupation with Scott Brison’s sexual orientation.

    As they warn in the press, the last thing any reporter wants to become is the story themselves.

    Globe’s self serving solution: Censor comments from the public under the guise of some other pretense. Hey, maybe Jane Taber and the Glib and Mail have learned a few of Harper’s favorite tricks of late. Maybe it was National Security related?

  16. Dan

    The most remarkable thing about that picture to me is that the retriever is running towards the water – completely against type!

  17. Dan

    ^ Should say “is NOT”

  18. Drake

    Is it homophobic to say that marriage is between a man and a woman? Isn’t that just stating a basic, obvious premise?

    What future progeny can we expect from this handsome duo? To ask the question is to answer it. None, nada, zippo.

    Marriage is the foundation of society. It permits our future existence. Gay “marriage” is a sterile and absurd imitation of marriage. Gay “marriage” has no future. It constitutes a dead end. The end of the biological line.

  19. philosoraptor

    ^^^^ Obvious troll is obvious.

  20. My first thought was that the norm in Christmas photos is for couples to stand close together. It may be the first gay political Christmas card, but they’re still having to play it safe. I hope that changes.

  21. Drake

    “…the norm in Christmas photos…”

    We no longer have norms for marriage, but we should have norms for Christmas photos?

  22. Ti-Guy

    Marriage is the foundation of society. It permits our future existence. Gay “marriage” is a sterile and absurd imitation of marriage. Gay “marriage” has no future. It constitutes a dead end. The end of the biological line.

    Look on the bright side. Hunky men like that getting together with each other leaves more pussy for losers like you.

  23. jkg

    The end of the biological line

    Why is it that opponents of same sex marriage are so quick to invoke biology yet betray their amateurish understanding of it with such statements? I wonder if they have ever cracked open a volume of Nature , Science , Evolution , PNAS , or TREE for that matter.

  24. Drake

    I wonder if Scott Brison ever regrets his opportunistic jump to the Liberals in 6 years ago this month. At the time he jumped, right after Paul Martin became Liberal leader, the talk was that the Liberals would get over 200 seats in the following election. The sky was the limit for the Liberals under Paul Martin – until the floor gave way with adscam.

    Not exactly a show of character from the man.

  25. Drake

    jkg – I do take an interest in the country’s birthrate. Our country is not producing enough children. It requires at least 2.1 children per couple to replace to ensure the survival of society.

    That’s why for example I laugh at the Quebecers who talk about “la survivance” and yet don’t have a sufficient birthrate to allow their society to survive and flourish. And they get all uptight when the immigrants to their society don’t do the jig like they do and bow 5 times a day to Mohamed etc… In other words, they expect them to become good little Quebecers just like them. Duceppe is a good prototype for them. There chronic complainers spending their time shaking their fists at reality.

    Back to the topic, I think gay “marriages” don’t do much for the birthrate. I thought that wasn’t a particularly controversial statement. You will enlighten me, no doubt.

  26. Ti-Guy

    How many kids do you have, Drake?

  27. Drake

    I have four Ti-Guy – 1.9 more than the average we need to survive as a society. Not a huge contribution, I’ll admit, but I’ve done my part.

  28. Careful RT, with the way the comments are going here you might have to follow the Globe and Mail’s lead.

  29. Yikes, four more Drakes!

  30. Ti-Guy

    I have four Ti-Guy…

    Sure you do.

  31. Eric — I haven’t seen anything that’s “hateful and homophobic”… Maybe I just attract a better class of people than the Globe & Mail. 😉

  32. Drake

    Eric, unfortunately, or fortunately, depending on your perspective, they don’t all think like me.

    As to your previous comment, surely you jest, most Canadians agree with me on this one Eric, marriage is between a man and a woman. That hardly makes one a homophobe.

    You wouldn’t be a Quebecer, per chance? You guys are demographically going to hell in handbasket, I hope you realize that.

    The biggest issue facing Quebec isn’t the national question of whether Quebec should be independant, it’s which quebecois will be the last one to turn out the lights. Quebec’s current vapid culture is not sustaining itself, and it’s not the anglos fault, it’s les maudits quebecois’ fault – they aren’t making babies.

  33. Drake — Considering the small number of gay marriages, the impact on the country’s birthrate is completely insignificant, so your argument is a bit of a red herring. Besides, gay couples can have children via surrogates or other non-traditional means, as well as adoption. Also, it should be noted that some heterosexual couples choose not have children for various reasons, in addition to those who are infertile or otherwise incapable of reproducing, as well as those who may be entering into a second marriage after having already had children from their previous relationship(s).

  34. Drake

    RT – gays don’t help the birthrate but they’re not the cause of plummeting birth rates, agreed.

    On the other hand, we misconstrue marriage when we think children are merely an option or an ornament to it. We don’t live in a very child-friendly society. Re-defining marriage to make children a mere adjunct to it, as we’ve done to allow gay marriage, was a bad idea. Children are an essential part of marriage and assure our society’s future. To hold otherwise is not very wise. Quebec is at the cutting edge of this, they’ll learn soon enough that without children, your culture may as well be on life-support.

    I see Eric’s moved on, going to beat his little drum of Quebec independence, the equivalent of re-arranging the chairs on the deck of the titanic. Demography is destiny. You’d think if anyone would know that it’s Quebecers themselves, having survived for 400 years due to their previously prolific birthrates.

  35. — “As to your previous comment, surely you jest, most Canadians agree with me on this one Eric, marriage is between a man and a woman.”

    Polls have shown that an overwhelming number of Canadians support the gay marriage legislation and would not change it. I’m afraid you’re in the minority.

    — “That hardly makes one a homophobe.”

    It doesn’t help.

    — “You wouldn’t be a Quebecer, per chance? You guys are demographically going to hell in handbasket, I hope you realize that.”

    I am a Quebecer, and Quebec is not under-going anything that most of the Western world already isn’t – including Canada. But after a few generations, immigrants tend to have as many children as the host society. Quebecers, too, were once incredibly fertile. But prosperity goes hand in hand with low birth-rates.

    — “The biggest issue facing Quebec isn’t the national question of whether Quebec should be independant, it’s which quebecois will be the last one to turn out the lights. Quebec’s current vapid culture is not sustaining itself, and it’s not the anglos fault, it’s les maudits quebecois’ fault – they aren’t making babies.”

    I’ll leave aside your ignorant “vapid culture” comment, but you’re wrong. Immigrants who come to Quebec and integrate into Quebecois society become part of Quebec’s culture. Quebec’s population is growing, not shrinking.

  36. — “gays don’t help the birthrate but they’re not the cause of plummeting birth rates, agreed.”

    This does not have anything to do with marriage. If gay people were not allowed to marry, they’d produce as many babies as they do now that they do have equal rights.

    — “On the other hand, we misconstrue marriage when we think children are merely an option or an ornament to it.”

    They are an option. I plan to get married. I do not plan to have children.

    — “We don’t live in a very child-friendly society.”

    Ha! Everything is about babies and children.

    — “I see Eric’s moved on,”

    Sheesh, I’m sorry I did not answer you for 40 MINUTES.

  37. jkg

    That’s why for example I laugh at the Quebecers who talk about “la survivance” and yet don’t have a sufficient birthrate to allow their society to survive and flourish

    You are wrong, again, Drake, it has been reported that in the past 3 to 4 years, Quebec has actually experience a mini baby boom thanks to the province’s social programs and they were able to achieve that despite having the highest proportion of common law couples and an increasing number of single parent families.

    Back to the topic, I think gay “marriages” don’t do much for the birthrate. I thought that wasn’t a particularly controversial statement

    If you are so concerned about the demographic repercussions of gay marriage, then why don’t outlaw the marriage of sterile heterosexual people? Better yet, demand that people reproduce or take away their marriage certificate after a certain time. Did you know that the amount of births in females is largely negatively dependent on educational level? Maybe we should make sure women don’t go to university.

    You will enlighten me, no doubt.

    I have already mentioned a slew of scientific journals to read, Drake; enlighten yourself. The fact of the matter is a myriad of species from primates to birds to snails are able to have robust birth rates despite having homosexual unions and engaging in sex not used specifically for reproduction. This might shock you, but causes of birth rates are manifold as any ecologist would tell you, since there is an enormous interplay of factors that determine the reproduction and survival of the succeeding generations. So, your biological premise is nothing more than a red herring especially since the number of same sex married couples in 2006 was recorded to be a whopping 7 500; I am sure that is portending the doom of society and driving heterosexual people to not reproduce.

    Re-defining marriage to make children a mere adjunct to it, as we’ve done to allow gay marriage, was a bad idea

    This is nonsense. Has it ever occurred to you that even same sex couples would like nothing more than to raise a child together? Gay marriage says nothing of the general social view towards raising children. Heck, homosexual people are mentors and key influences in the lives of many children, even their own nieces and nephews. To say this a symptom of an anti-natalist culture ignores the vast market and media obsession with mothers. Your claim is an assertion at best. Don’t try to project the failings and negative opinions of a minority of people about children onto the rest of society. Today, it is markedly difficult to raise children given the costs of living and inflation. Some couples simply cannot afford to raise a child on their own. The Quebec government seemed to have figured that out quite well.

  38. jkg

    — Considering the small number of gay marriages, the impact on the country’s birthrate is completely insignificant, so your argument is a bit of a red herring.

    Oh, you beat me to it, Red. Sorry, some of my post is echoing Red.

  39. philosoraptor

    Drake, welcome back from wherever you’ve been for the last five years. In the meantime, the rest of the country has already discussed your ridiculous points ad nauseum. Your point of view is now boring and outdated, and your assertions are silly. Might I recommend the use of Google or another search engine so that you can save us the tedium of trodding over this ground for the 13,213th time.

  40. It’s a pretty tiresome argument, isn’t it? Unlike our American friends, I think the vast majority of Canadians have long since moved on from this “issue” — having sensibly realized that the sky didn’t collapse, the Almighty didn’t unleash a torrent of natural disasters on us in retribution, etc., and it’s had no impact on their lives whatsoever.

    Why Drake is so concerned about demographics is likely a whole different issue, but one that’s not really germane in any way at all to gay marriage.

  41. benalbanach

    I got married (to a woman as it happens) with no intention whatsoever of having kids. To whom should I apologise ?
    On the one hand there are folks who insist the world is overpopulated while on the other there’s Drake popping them out fast as he can.
    As for the card..Maybe they should have carried guns or something ?

  42. Guns a brace of dead birds in hand… Yeah, that’s the ticket.

  43. So, I guess the only reason for marriage is to have babies according to Drake – all those married couples that don’t have kids should divorce immediately.

    The likes of Drake believing those religious leaders that can’t even control their people and stop them from diddling with kids.

  44. Martin

    Turning from anti-gay bigotry to a more interesting comment made by Ti-Guy:

    ‘I’ve said it before…the em-ess-em should can all of this user-generated content chock-a-block with “interactivity.”’

    Yes, please…but I’m not sure how to get this message across: Please, please, please, stop “giving voice” (blech) to every idiot with a keyboard. It is depressing.

    I’ve been looking around the internet for any signs of a serious discussion about this, and can’t find any. I was hoping there would be some signs of movement away from all this the “post a comment” bullshit, but… I suppose it’s just too cheap a trick to get pointers clicking on pages.

    sigh

  45. Martin

    Oh…and, by the way, the Quebec birthrate has recently been rising, due in part it seems to its relatively excellent $7/day universal childcare policy.

  46. Drake

    “Why Drake is so concerned about demographics is likely a whole different issue, but one that’s not really germane in any way at all to gay marriage.”

    Oh, it’s entirely germane to it, Red, entirely germane to it. We’ve divorced sex from making children, which is the point of it, indeed, we’ve upped the ante, by divorcing the concept of marriage from that of making children and raising families. The law of the land says so.

    The europeans are not reproducing themselves and over slowly being overtaken by the muslims who are. Why do you think Switzerland had to legislate against minarets the other day. Why is it that Quebecers are up in arms about accomodating cultural minorities in their midst? It is because they realize that their culture is in jeopardy. Quebec’s problem today is no longer anglo oppression, it’s Quebecer’s refusal to make babies. As I said, that’s not the federal government or the anglos’ fault.

    Eric is prototypical in this respect – ” I plan to get married. I don’t plan to have children.” He’s a walking example of the incongruency of the separatist movement.

    Quebec is no longer the demographically dynamic society that it once was. It is aging, dying society. As for immigrants who come there, they may integrate into Quebec society, as Eric says, but they don’t share the same hang-ups and inferiority complex vis-à-vis Canada that many Quebecers have. The upshot is this, Quebec is too lethargic a society to separate and go their own way. The new immigrants who arrive there don’t, and won’t ever see the point of separating from Canada.

  47. Navvy

    Banning minarets decreases the muslim (read darky) birth rate? Those Swiss are clever.

  48. TofKW

    The upshot is this, Quebec is too lethargic a society to separate and go their own way. The new immigrants who arrive there don’t, and won’t ever see the point of separating from Canada.

    On this Drake is quite correct. The old school sovereigntists (now in their 60’s & 70’s) realize this too, which is why they are hoping for another constitutional crisis to occur within the next decade. Otherwise their future is pretty grim. The new kids in the PQ/Bloc are not as hard-core about sovereignty as much as simply achieving more provincial powers via threats …sort of like Alberta. In many ways it was a smart move on Harper’s part to reach out to Quebec’s soft nationalists, as they and Alberta’s conservatives have a somewhat common vision of the Canadian federation. Of course that strategy also comes with great risks, and you can have a fascinating chat with Brian Mulroney on that topic.

  49. Guzzeuntite

    “I got married (to a woman as it happens).” —
    benalbanach

    How banal.

  50. Guzzeuntite

    “Unlike our American friends, I think the vast majority of Canadians have long since moved on from this ‘issue….'” — RT

    Really? The latest poll I saw saw a bit more than half supported it. That not “vast.” More than 80% would be “vast,” I’d say. What does the latest poll say?

    Note: I am generally agnostic on the issue, though I am very sympathetic to the view of the religious.

  51. Guzzeuntite

    The second and third sentences in my second paragraph are barely English, but I hope you get their meaning.

  52. most Canadians agree with me on this one Eric, marriage is between a man and a woman.

    Evidence?

    (Most Canadians thought Natives should be housed in schools to “civilize” them once. Arguments like this are silly.)

    I have no problem with the (religious) rite of “Holy Matrimony” being between a man and woman, but from a civil point of view, marriage is a legal contract between two consenting adults which provides certain legal responsibilities and protections to them. 8 provincial courts and two parliament votes have already determined this.

    The europeans are not reproducing themselves and over slowly being overtaken by the muslims who are.

    Bullshit. Read: http://www.vancouversun.com/life/Muslims+seek+dominate+West+could+they/1897065/story.html

    The whole idea that a population needs to keep growing else not be dynamic is absurd. How many people can we fit on this planet before our environment collapses out from underneath us? Are we no different than yeast in a petri dish where we keep multiplying until we run out of food and are poisoned by our own waste?

    The reason Quebec and Europe aren’t growing anymore (and is aging) has nothing to do with gay marriage or marriage at all. It has everything to do with a modern, capitalist, free market economy and social structure that makes having kids a major financial expense with no financial return.

    Ironically right-wingers support an economy where having kids becomes a less attractive option. They also opposed subsidized child care which would also ease the financial burden of children.

  53. Drake

    “Oh, it’s entirely germane to it, Red, entirely germane to it. We’ve divorced sex from making children, which is the point of it, indeed, we’ve upped the ante, by divorcing the concept of marriage from that of making children and raising families. The law of the land says so.”

    I should add, we changed the said law of the land to accomodate gay “marriage.” Marriage is now only about two adults having sex. Or as the statute now says, marriage “is the lawful union of two persons to the exclusion of all others.” Children, well that’s an afterthought. Before the legislative change, the union was between a man and a woman, a union that makes children, and future citizens of the realm.

    We’ve forgotten the point of sex and marriage. So we changed our laws. And we’ve dumbed down our culture as a result. It’s all about shagging now. Progress? I don’t think so.

  54. Guzzeuntite

    “Ironically right-wingers support an economy where having kids becomes a less attractive option. They also opposed subsidized child care which would also ease the financial burden of children.”

    Yes. If we all did as you said, we’d have birth rates like Russia or most of Europe, where the welfare state has been in place for decades. Gosh, those Soviets helped families and the kids out so much, I hear that the birth rate is, like 5.9. Or MORE!

  55. Marriage is now only about two adults having sex.

    It always has. We allow the elderly and the infertile to marry. Gays are just an additional (possibly if you exclude IVF or surrogate parenting or adoption) infertile (and sometimes) elderly group.

    I always wonder how right-wingers reconcile all their contradictions.

    Finally marriage has nothing to do with sex. It has to do with rights and responsibilities. You don’t have to have sex to get married in any modern country.

  56. Yes. If we all did as you said, we’d have birth rates like Russia or most of Europe, where the welfare state has been in place for decades. Gosh, those Soviets helped families and the kids out so much, I hear that the birth rate is, like 5.9. Or MORE!

    Logical fallacy. Correlation are two different things.

  57. Yes. If we all did as you said, we’d have birth rates like Russia or most of Europe, where the welfare state has been in place for decades. Gosh, those Soviets helped families and the kids out so much, I hear that the birth rate is, like 5.9. Or MORE!

    Logical fallacy. Correlation and causation are two different things.

  58. Guzzeuntite

    “Correlation are two different things.” — said someone whose name I can’t easily spell.

    Correlation is ONE thing.

  59. Guzzeuntite

    “Correlation and causation are two different things.”

    Duh.

    So are car and carrots.

    It’s better to say, “Correlation does not mean causation.”

    Indeed. Except in this case.

  60. An assertion without evidence.

  61. Guzzeuntite

    “Try again Guzzy.” — said someone whose name I can’t easily spell.

    I see YOU did.

  62. Guzzeuntite

    “An assertion without evidence.”

    Is this like Mark Francis’s “factless assertion”?

    Correlation IS evidence.

    Just ask an AGW Scientist.

  63. Guzzeuntite

    Remember the Hockey Stick?

  64. If you think that’s what AGW scientists are saying you’re not paying attention or you’re getting your “news” from Murdoch again.

  65. Let’s stick to this topic. We can work through your wingnut “science” another time.

  66. CWTF

    It may be the first gay political Christmas card, but they’re still having to play it safe.
    Quite so…. I’ve seen hetero male friends be closer for most pictures…
    The picture does not scream “we are a couple”.

  67. Guzzeuntite

    “Let’s stick to this topic. We can work through your wingnut “science” another time,” said someone whose name I can’t easily spell.

    I didn’t change the topic. You did. I just gave an example of correlation (the Hockey Stick graph) being used as evidence of causation (that man has caused golbal warming), but if you think the Hockey Stick isn’t evidnece of AGW, who am I to argue?

  68. Guzzeuntite

    “It may be the first gay political Christmas card …”

    Another Factless Assertion ™ proved wrong by Guzzeutite:

  69. There’s just too much stupid in those two posts for me.

  70. Drake

    Guzzeuntite has a point, Brison’s is the second gay political Christmas card, the WH beat him to it.

    No surprise there.

  71. Guzzeuntite

    You’re referring to the other commenters that I was quoting, of course.

  72. Guzzeuntite

    My last response was to someone whose name I can’t easily spell, not Drake.

  73. Drake:

    The article says:

    “This is the first time, meanwhile, the couple has posed together for a Christmas card and it is likely the first same-sex married-couple MP Christmas card.”

    What does that have to do with the White House?

  74. Guzzeuntite

    Someone whose name I can’t easily spell, you are a humorless prig.

    The comment was that the card “may be the first gay political Christmas card”

    This card is gay — big time: http://rlv.zcache.com/white_house_christmas_card-p1378046352337568483pa3_400.jpg

    So, there! The Canadians try again to claim they invented something, but again the truth prevails:

    America invented the gay political Christmas card! Ha ha ha!

    I shall alert Sir Francis, Scotian, and Ti-Guy. Their Canadian Pride is again trampled into the dirt by American can-do-ism and free-market dynamism.

  75. CWTF

    Someone whose name I can’t easily spell, you are a humorless prig.
    Copy/paste too advanced for you?

  76. Guzzeuntite

    Yes, WftC

  77. benalbanach

    Guzzeuntite.
    Banal: lacking originality, freshness, or novelty .
    Like your comment ?

  78. Guzzeuntite

    I shall explain the X-mas card joke, someone whose name I can’t easily spell.

    If you ever watched South Park, you would know that (in the US at least) “gay” now means something “silly,” “stupid,” “not fun,” or “bad” — as in “I don’t want to watch ‘Degrassi High’ or CFL. They are both so gay.”

    Now this is only fair, since the word “gay” was usurped in the ’60’s or something by certain people who wanted to change its meaning from “happy” to “homosexual” (not that there’s anything wrong with that™).

    Ironically “gay” now has almost the opposite meaning that it did in, say, the 19th century.

  79. Guzzeuntite

    “Banal: lacking originality, freshness, or novelty .
    Like your comment ?”

    Nope.

  80. So in other words, you have the maturity of a high schooler, to go along with your spelling disability.

    No surprise there.

    Actually the term wasn’t “usurped” by “certain” people. The word “gay” had connotations of frivolousness and showiness in dress (“gay attire”) which led to a association with camp and effeminacy which is associated with male homosexuality.

  81. Guzzeuntite

    “Finally marriage has nothing to do with sex.” — Said someone whose name I can’t easily spell

    In that regard, I agree with you 1000%.

  82. Guzzeuntite

    “So in other words, you have the maturity of a high schooler, to go along with your spelling disability,” said someone whose name I can’t easily spell

    You really don’t know much, do you? The kids in South Park are in fourth grade.

  83. So high school kids don’t use the term?

  84. Guzzeuntite

    “Actually the term wasn’t “usurped” by “certain” people,” said someone whose name I can’t easily spell.

    “Certain people” lie. It was usurped, I tell you.

  85. Guzzeuntite

    “So high school kids don’t use the term?” — said someone whose name I can’t easily spell.

    How the hell should I know? I don’t watch gay shows like Degrassi High.

  86. Guzzeuntite

    “says the liar.”

    That does not make sense. I am not a certain person.

  87. Jim

    I couldn’t care less about SSM, but Jay, if you keep lording your education and feeling of superiority over your potential bed partners, you are gonna be a lonely man.

    Sometimes it pays to smile sweetly and nod at the inane drivel just so you can have the prize at the end. 🙂

    BTW, I think the card is nice.

  88. my bet is Drake hasn’t even had sex 4 times in his life. the pent-up frustration is a dead give-away 😉

  89. Hmm.

    So, uh.. a guy is gay and wants to share the joy of his marriage with others.

    So what?

    Frankly, I think personal picture Christmas cards are for losers, and I don’t really care if it’s husband/husband or husband/wife or wife/wife.. whatever.

    Unless there’s a nipple showing.

    Then that’s ok.

  90. CWTF

    Wow Rob, you maybe the only Conservative with a hint of a sense of humour… What gives?

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s