|
Comments, Love Letters, and Death Threats
Comment Archive 10
The posts below were made from February 28, 2003 to March 26, 2003.
You can also visit our previous comment archive, containing messages from January 18, 2003 to February 27, 2003.
To make a post, please visit the main comment page.
Name: Nikita
E-mail: funky_nickie@yahoo.com
Subject: Shit!
So, are the fuckin Europeans right when they say Americans
are ignorant? Or is it just that those gutless French pussies w/o balls
stole a Russian name and didn't even understand it was a MALE one?
For fuck's sake, I'm a GUY!
That's okay, though, I'm not insulted, as long as you don't start
posting indecent proposals to my mailbox.
On the second thought, I'm alright with the proposals as long as you
keep writing. Don't stop.
N
PS Ah, it probably all stems from that stupid series about the French
cunt who was a kind of a secret agent or something. I didn't know France
had any intelligence service. Anyway, it doesn't work, apparently.
Intelligence! Fucking jerks!
Editor's Note: Blame the French. You're right: the only "Nikita" I ever heard of was that Femme Nikita. But the next stripper I meet named Nikita better show me what's under her goddamn dress. (JR)
March 26, 2003 at 12:18:30
Name: Richard
E-mail: thomson_richard@hotmail.com
Subject: Iraq
Nobody protesting against the war here in Britain thinks that
Saddamm is a nice man.
Most of your quotes come from Amnesty international who are (from when
I read this month's issue) against the war.
We can not arbiterily invade countries in order to remove their leaders
especially without UN backing. It's wrong.
Also post-war who the hell d'ya think'll get all the oil contracts.
You are having a go at us who feel that american self-interest as a
result of crap foreign policy and desire for oil should have a price in
human lives.
I wholeheartedly disagree with this.
Richard Thomsone.
Editor's Note: We can, however, rationally invade countries to remove their leaders without UN backing. (JR)
March 26, 2003 at 10:01:56
Name: Dissenter
Subject: War Article
Fuck you. FUCK you, you vicious, petty thug. You
anti-American scatophage. You don't like people protesting peacefully? Then join
the Iraqi military. They love your brand of lockstepping brownshirt over
there. Peaceful protest doesn't translate into Saddam support,
mouth-breather. Intelligence is often described as the ability to hold two
opposing ideas in one's head at the same time - or, as I like to call it,
"O.J. did it AND the LAPD is corrupt."
This country has crossed the threshhold that separates a Republic from
a maurading empire. With sociopaths like you cheering them on, no
wonder the crypto-fascist cabal that runs this country is shredding the
Constitution.
Enjoy the police state you're helping to create, you pathetic coward.
Enjoy your unprovoked wars, your wiretappings, your secret arrests, your
religious-fanatic Attorney General, and your goose-stepping solipsism.
Enjoy beating the peaceniks and hippies and socialists and commies and
college profs. Because when there's no one left, the only place left to
turn your shrieking mindless rampage will be the pile of useless
clothing you stare at in the mirror.
Editor's Note: You are using the word "peaceful" to describe subhumans who puked on sidewalks, blocked rush hour traffic, and vandalized private property. These were the "protesters" I referred to in the article. Please consider directing your article responses to writers who actually write the articles to which you are responding. (JR)
March 25, 2003 at 20:56:57
Name: Erik
Subject: Nuke Em
In regard to your article about the war. Why not just threaten to nuke
them. We have the nukes and they don't. If they don't change the regime
or comply with demands for disarmament just nuke and start over. We
should also spend lots of money on anti-nuke patriot missiles. They seem
to be doing a fine job against the scuds so if Russia starts getting
pissy we can shoot their nukes right out of the sky. You'd think 20
billion would make them be on our side but it just goes to show you that
money can't buy allies. Fuck em. We don't need em they are all drunks
anyway. I say pull the troops out and send the missiles aflyin. Once they
surrender then rebuild the shit and have them make nice cars like the
Japanese.
March 25, 2003 at 16:44:06
Name: Doug
E-mail: dhaze048@uottawa.ca
Subject: 119...
About the 119 people list,: I did laugh. I did enjoy it. And if
*that* was the point of the article, I retract my comments.
Editor's Note: You're forgiven. And I'm sure Ben thanks you. (JR)
March 25, 2003 at 14:21:21
Name: Doug
E-mail: dhaze048@uottawa.ca
Subject: 119 Reasons...
That article certainly takes a dive in the quality
department. I could spout off a list of people I hate too. Better yet, I could say *why* I hate them!
That's the same question I want you to answer: Why? Why post it?
Editor's Note: You didn't laugh when you got to "Elves"? I sure did. (JR)
March 25, 2003 at 02:40:26
Name: Rick Signer
E-mail: pizzadude@sluggy.net
Subject: Ben's List
Being a native of Detroit, I just have to ponder this aloud -
how is it that Ben hates Uncle Kracker, but has nothing against Kid Rock?
Rock on.
March 25, 2003 at 00:19:42
Name: Jessica
Subject: Joe Superior, Egomania, And Oscar Night
What's wrong with a little unchecked egomania? I don't believe there is such a thing as being too confident. Everything I have achieved in life can be traced back to my unwavering self-confidence and positive attitude towards myself. Not to mention that I have had a lot of people tell me that the self-assured way that I present myself is quite attractive. The word "egomaniac" is used only by those who lack self esteem and are bitter about seeing this trait in others. I suggest working on your own self image before criticizing anyone else.
On a completely unrelated topic, I caught some of the Oscars telecast on Sunday night. As expected, uninformed celebrities voiced their leftist democratic liberal views about the war. I respect their rights to have these opinions, but the fact that these people are taking advantage of their easy access to the media to try to convince us that our country is somehow fucked up beyond hope makes me sick. People in the public eye, especially, should be setting an example and supporting their country to the fullest extent.
- LOVE JESSICA
P.S. Not all republicans are bible-wielding altruist rednecks, for those of us who are confused. Please don't make assertions without getting the facts.
Editor's Note: You're 100% right about "egomania". Anyone I've seen who does appear to be obsessed with himself is in reality obsessed with how others perceive him. I'd also like to point out that I can't think of a single word for the opposite. A little research tells me that maybe it should be "allomania". (JR)
March 24, 2003 at 23:06:31
Name: David Buchner
E-mail: buchner@wcta.net
Website: customer.wcta.net/buchner
Subject: Further
Joe Fuckface was concerned about how our country is evil,
too, because we spend so much on defense. But he also said he wasn't
opposed to the war. I guess we should be wiping out Saddam's entire
government with rocks and sticks.
I've been watching the TV news, and thinking over and over again: WOW!
So THAT'S what we were spending all that money on! And LOOK, it all
WORKS!
Editor's Note: Our military is impressive. I just hope that as we get to Baghdad, we don't risk our soldiers' lives for the sake of the people who were cheering about our downed helicopter. (JR)
March 24, 2003 at 21:53:35
Name: David Buchner
E-mail: buchner@wcta.net
Website: customer.wcta.net/buchner
Subject: War! And cuss-word gender equity!
I was encouraged to see that you're working on including the
word "cunt" in more of your writings. It's about time.
I also laughed when you referred to the Swedish Chief Appeaser, and I
read it as the Swedish CHEF Appeaser. Which is a whole different mental
image. Or is it?
I'm responding frivolously because I'm still too paralyzed with anger
to put coherent words together. At least let me say your clarity is
refreshing. It took until tonight for me to realize, "Gee, I bet Jason Roth
has something good to say about the war!" My
anti-war-protest-organizing, fried old hippy neighbor keeps e-mailing me candlelight vigil
schedules. I've had the same "just fuck off already - I oppose you in every
possible way" response to her cued up to send for more than a week, and
now I'm thinking I should just forward what you said instead.
I love that you called it 10,000 Frenchmen before this whole recent
Chirac thing happened.
Editor's Note: I'm also too paralyzed with anger, but that doesn't stop me from putting words together. (Hence, the two edits I mentioned below.) It sounds like you ought to send what you wrote. It sounds too good to waste. (JR)
March 24, 2003 at 21:43:12
Name: Nikita
E-mail: funky_nickie@yahoo.com
Subject: Everything
Jason,
Hey there, you also liked "The Language Instinct"! That makes you twice as fucking great as I'd thought. BTW, have you seen celiberal.com? Me & my friends, we laughed our asses off imagining Arnie, Van Damme, Chuck Norris, Clint Eastwood & Bruce Willis (yeah, and Dennis Hopper) beating the fuck out of Di Caprio & Madonna. Leftists, my fucking ass!
Hey, we here in Ukraine are all on your side! Rock on!
Another thing: our president promised to send Ukrainian troops specially equipped to deal with consequences of a chemical accident. (They having passed through Chernobyl and all). Yeah, what fucking chemicals is he talking about? They ain't got 'em! Ha fucking ha.
It's a fucking shame & disgrace to see many of our local folk ranting about American imperialism. Like the Soviet years ain't taught 'em nothin'. That kinda shit comes from Russian media which many in this part of Ukraine watch. Shit! Putin is a dictator, and he too should be fucking removed by force!
Well, I must go now. Fucking spring's outside, after all.
N
PS Disclaimer: I still think "Catch Me If U Can" is a great movie.
Editor's Note: What are you still doing over there? I thought all the decent Ukrainian women were in New York City working at strip clubs... Thanks for mentioning that site, it looks promising. And I agree, I liked that movie, too. (JR)
March 24, 2003 at 12:28:27
Name: Joe Superior
E-mail: manfo999_@hotmail.com
Website: www.killpseudo-intellectuals.org
Subject: Fuckface you
Jason,
I partially blame poor parenting for the way you turned out, but mostly
I blame the cult-like teachings of that philosophical quack Ayn Rand.
You are the perfect example of untreated social and emotional problems,
as well as unchecked ego-mania. Your sickness/wackiness used to be
amusing to me, not anymore. I only visit this website maybe once a year. I
visited it the other day just to see what your warped opinion would be
of the war. But the way you talked about the peace protesters (some of
whom I know I would hate)-macing and beating them, etc. - for getting
in the way of your precious little car on your way to your cush job.
Give me a fucking break. If this was Germany 1938- you would be a Nazi.
Utterly revolting.
Joe Superior
Editor's Note: As much of a scumbag I see that you are, you nevertheless convinced me to reread my article and think about whether I was too emotional in my remarks. I was. My anger with the lawbreakers, combined with what I know to be their anti-American motives, got carried away to the point that I advocated an unreasonable use of force to control criminal (not peaceful) activity. Therefore, I have edited two paragraphs to eliminate this from the article. You can see the exact edits here. Your ability to change my mind reminds me of an episode of All in the Family when Archie was told that "Every man is my superior in that I may learn from him." Archie was told this by a mentally-retarded grocery-store bagger. Anyway, you remind me of that retard, and I thank you. (JR)
March 24, 2003 at 11:47:45
Name: Robin the naked postman
E-mail: erobjt@hotmail.com
Subject: America's war against Iraq
Assuming that the war in Iraq hasn't been messily resolved by
the time I post this comment, this is my 50c on the matter.
Saddam is a ruthless and sadistic dictator, he's a plague on his own
citizens and a menace to both his neighbouring countries and the world.
The Iraqies I have met in the last week agree with me that Saddam has to
go.
It isn't the responsibility of America to be the world police men and
go to war against Iraq, after all- thats what the United Nations are
supposed to be there for.
However the fact is that the UN has been toothless and bumbling for too
long, Saddam continues to get more dangerous and powerful every year
that passes and something NEEDED to be done pronto.
I personally applaud America's actions against Iraq, but its a shame
that they had to take this vigilante approach to the situation. After
this war has climaxed, the UN deserves a ripe slapping and a reality
check, to be reminded of its responsibilities and of what it actually exists
to do.
GO AMERICA!
Robin from New Zealand
Editor's Note: Glad you're on our side. But it's not "vigilantism". That would imply that there is a legitimate set of international laws and the necessary bodies to enforce those laws. The world, at least as it is now, is like the Wild West. And yes, goddamn it, we should be cowboys. (JR)
March 22, 2003 at 16:27:37
Name: Arwen
E-mail: arwen83@msn.com
Subject: Nothin' but love
I just want to post a random declaration of my love for this site. Every article etc. is right on target. Keep it up, Jason!
P.S. My roommate and I laughed about the pick-up line asking if you could analyze her music choices from a psychological perspective... we would have laughed.
Editor's Note: Thanks for taking the time to say so. P.S. If you would have laughed at that line, then you must actually have some amount of self esteem. But that doesn't mean I wouldn't have drawn harsh conclusions about your childhood had you, for example, picked "Billy Jean" on the jukebox. (JR)
March 22, 2003 at 12:14:44
Name: Warrior
E-mail: davengena@rural-com.com
Subject: polygamy
I read your comments on polygamy, and found that your comments are accurate. We let our government rule our lives too much about anything any more. Do not we have our own brains, and intellect, to let us sort out if something is "right for us" I do believe it is called freedom of choice.
While I do not condone the use of drugs, booze, or abortions, I feel I would be seriously tampering with an individuals freedom to deny them these things. Let GOD and them hash it out when it is their time.
We should have legitimately impeached Bill Clinton. Not for the act of oral sex, but for the act of lying under oath, and setting a rotten example to the American public.
Even he, however, would not have been scrutinized by the American public, or the world, had we not had anti-polygamy laws. He could have legally married Monica, and nothing would have been said. I doubt he would have married her, but that is another discussion.
I feel (we) the American public, gets so caught up in every one else'slives that we forget to live our own.
There is a song sang by Willie Nelson, Hank Jr., and a few other country outlaws that states in part of one of the verses "If you mind your own business, you'd be busy all the time!" I think that pretty much sums up this gun totin' ass whoopin redneck's opinion on life.
By the way, this is my point of view. For those of you who do not like us rednecks you can kiss my half-breed American Indian and German ass! They do not call me warrior for nothing!
March 22, 2003 at 01:58:50
Name: Jessica
Subject: Violent Peace Protests?
Does it make any sense whatsoever that the fucking "peace protesters" would get violent with the citizens of their own country? It didn't make much sense to me either. Upon returning from work this afternoon I was solicited by a group of these obviously uninformed protesters who were asking for donations of money. When I refused (because first: I'm actually informed about the war and second: I don't just give away my hard earned cash to people who look like they just rolled out of bed and toked up) one of them actually grabbed me by the wrist! Needless to say I was quite shocked and extremely pissed. I'm not sure whether or not this was actually intended to be a violent action, but what you were saying about these people is correct. Anyone who has the nerve to interfere with my daily life because of their brainlessness needs to be dealt with. I don't mind people voicing their opinions, but please don't drag me into it. Just thought I'd bitch some more. So much for the "peace" they are so desperately seeking.
- LOVE JESSICA
Editor's Note: Damn right. Free "speech" does not entail grabbing people by the wrist. (JR)
March 21, 2003 at 22:27:37
Name: Jen
Subject: In Full Support of
I am always so pleased with your site. I think that with this
article you have outdone yourself. I really don't even know what else
to say. You Rock!
Editor's Note: As far as I'm concerned, there is no single trait better than the capacity to "rock". Therefore, you rock for telling me that I rock. (JR)
March 21, 2003 at 20:15:07
Name: Balo
Subject: Full Support to USA
Unfortunately those "anti-war" motherfuckers are all over the world.
It is time to stop them and let the productive and competent people of the world live the life we deserve.
Think about this: Natural selection has stopped only in Humans, BUT the fact of the existence of the incompetent and the useless has not.
Saddam: We are gonna kick your fucking ass.
March 21, 2003 at 14:06:04
Name: Joe Fuckface
E-mail: manfo999_@hotmail.com
Subject: War
Jason,
I'm not against the war on Iraq, and I hope we get North Korea next.
However, every evil thing that you attribute to 'dictatorships' can be
said about the U.S.A. - violence against its own citizens (police
brutality, and murders of Daniel Carver, and that guy who wrote the book
"Fotunate Son" about George W.) stockpiling weapons (how much do we spend on
defense?) invading peaceful countries ( Iraq looked pretty peaceful to
me before the war).
My point is that it's one evil vs. another. Of course, being an
American, I prefer this evil over stinking middle-easterners, or koreans. But
I think it's more realistic to acknowledge that our government is
pretty fucking evil as well.
Joseph E. Fuckface III
Editor's Note: I partially blame Mr. Fuckface II for your idiocy. Daniel Carver? Why not mention slavery while you're at it? And to call Iraq "peaceful" is dishonest and not worthy of reply. (JR)
March 21, 2003 at 12:36:53
Name: sush
Subject: err... fool
Well I think if your saying that a protester should be maced
kicked in the head and thrown in a cell your basically being a
hyposrite. Lets kick iraqs ass for human rights violations. Well stopping
someone peacefully protesting sounds like a violation doesnt it.
If America had an honest president who perhaps hadnt already decided he
was going to avenge his fathers faliure to do it properly in 91 then
prehaps the world wouldnt have such a bad taste in its mouth about all
this.
You have such a polarised view its untrue.
Editor's Note: You stupid moron. The issue isn't about "peaceful protesting". It's about when they get in the way of my fucking car. Incidentally, I suggest you pick up a dictionary and look up the meaning of the word "avenge". (JR)
March 21, 2003 at 05:23:30
Name: Teece
Subject: 'supporting the war' article
Jason, well fucking said. Your article should be put on the
front page of every single newspaper in the world. These war protesters
dont know shit about the situation. Your article summed up the whole
picture. Well done.
Editor's Note: Can't you make your point without using the word "fuck"? Just kidding. If I can use it eight times in the article itself, you can use it at least once in your comment about the article. And I appreciate it. (JR)
March 21, 2003 at 04:44:51
Name: Right Rev. Otis Cleancheeks
Subject: fuckupyouwhinigpussy
If you get stung by a jellyfish you are supposed to piss on
it. That is real useless trivia, but true.
I am happy that we are bombing the crap out of the Iraqi army. I
finally have something to watch on TV that is more interesting and funny than
Spongebob Squarepants. It is funny because I just saw the only Iraqi
war ship and it looked like a really messed up S.S. Minnow from
Gilligan's Island. I hope that we blast them back to the stone age (not too far
to go though).
Editor's Note: Misc. news: the Jerusalem Post is reporting today (3/23/03) that U.S. troops have discovered the first chemical weapons plant. (JR)
March 20, 2003 at 12:55:53
Name: Stuart
E-mail: bumpinit4christ@aol.com
Subject: Rank-and-file Iraqis are not terrorists
Let's assume for a minute that Iraq *is* in some way
responsible for the attack on 9-11, and if you have proof of this, (not opinion
or punditry from politically biased sites,) I'd like to see links.
[Editor's Note: Who said anything about Saddam being behind September 11? If you want to argue with a straw man, at least be a little creative about it. (JR)]
If that's the case, why don't we just go kill the perpetrator, Saddam
Hussein? Why didn't we do so in Desert Storm?
[Editor's Note: Would you have been in favor of the U.S. disregarding U.N. mandate in the first Gulf War to enter Baghdad? We should have, but I doubt you'd have been in favor of it. (JR)]
We have thousands of the best special ops troops in the world, with the
support of the best military in the world. Why can't we just take out
one person?
[Editor's Note: We're trying, and we may have. But we're going to do it without our own soldiers being annihilated. Stop living in a fantasy land. (JR)]
I'll tell you why: World leaders, who decide international law, don't
like the idea of world leaders being assassinated. Throwing garbage
citizens into the killing radius of enemy weapons, however, is just fine.
"Let's carpet bomb the whole country," I hear people enthusiastically
say. Those *Iraqis* hate America. Those *Iraqis* hate freedom. Bullshit.
The average Iraqi is an analogue of the average American - a little bit
hyper-religious, easily duped by their leaders, and until they have
their simple little buttons pushed by the aristocracy, perfectly content
to mind their own business.
[Editor's Note: You must be hanging out with a lot of imbeciles, because I don't know anyone who's saying that about the "Iraqis". (JR)]
The terrorist attacks were unfair partly because they sought revenge
for the actions of the American *government* and leveled it against the
American *people* - two very different entities.
[Editor's Note: "Unfair"? Like the terrorists made some sort of tactical error? You are truly one amazingly brain-dead individual. (JR)]
Now we are going to do the same thing. We are going to liberate the
Iraqi people by killing them in greater numbers than the admittedly
barbaric Saddam Hussein ever has. But at least the survivors will be free, right? Right?
[Editor's Note: Please learn some facts before spewing your nonsense. Estimates of the number of Kurds killed by Hussein total over 100,000. Please also note the smiling and cheering of the Iraqis in response to the arrival of U.S. soldiers. (JR)]
Try searching the news for what's going on in Afghanistan
right now. (That country we 'liberated' a while back.) The Tailban is
out of power, and warlords just like them have taken over, religious
fundamentalism and all.
I don't buy that our government is waging war out of altruism or to
spread democracy. We The People do not know what this war is about, and we
are *not* in control.
[Editor's Note: You, one person, do not know what this war is about. That is because you are a moron. (JR)]
That goes for the United States and Iraq both.
And by the way, all wars kill at least a few babies. Not to mention the
adults they grow up to be. I think Americans like to talk tough about
war because they don't know anyone who has died in one. Would you burn
your car, if it freed an innocent Iraqi? No? Would you expose your
military-age child to VX gas? What about if there was no guarantee that the
Iraqi would be freed?
Editor's Note: Typical leftist skeptic - all questions, no answers. (JR)
March 19, 2003 at 18:36:12
Name: michael
E-mail: bumpinit4christ@aol.com
Subject: top 10 views by arron kendall
you r stupid ............none of your solutions to euthanasia
make sense u bastard
March 17, 2003 at 15:37:34
Name: sid
E-mail: paradisesid@aol.com
Subject: anti war protesters
This article reminded me of something I heard recently on the radio, with the reality of a war on our hands and the probability of terrorism in our country we have gone on a heightened state of alert. So naturally the september 10th crowed has announced that they will be not only increasing their protests but will also create civil unrest. Beautiful that is exactly what we need. Instead of our government/police force/whoever concentrating on preventing terrorist attacks they will be spending their valuable time babysitting these assholes. Well for all of you anti war protesters out there Saddam thanks you I'm sure, and I hope some al qaeda bastard notices one of your large protests and decides to release something deadly in the middle of your huge gathering of uneducated people, as opposed to harming everyone else who is at work and school keeping society functioning not throwing wrenches into the gears. I am not a fan of any form of government or bureaucracy but at least I know when to put my petty grievances aside and support what's best for my country. And support the people who are doing what you and myself included do not have the balls to do and that is fight in a war that they know they may never see an outcome to. If you can't come up with a better solution but insist on knocking the one available go do it from Iraq, our boys will meet you over there (just look above you they'll be the ones dropping bombs on your fucking heads). For those that choose to stay maybe I'll see you at one of your protests I'll be the one supporting our country.
March 19, 2003 at 03:29:48
Name: Christina
E-mail: computergeneratedjesus@yahoo.com
Subject: Question
Jason, thanks for the response. I was expecting a bigger
tongue lashing than that. I felt I got off easy.
Hey, if Kant and Hobbes got into a fist fight, who do you think would
win?
PS. I WANT THE JELLY FISH GUY IN 2004!
Editor's Note: I'll keep this reply nasty, brutish, and short. (JR)
March 18, 2003 at 10:21:15
Name: jack
Subject: I would prefer not to
that one is from bartleby the scrivener. that would be really funny to do.
March 18, 2003 at 08:22:02
Name: Doug
Subject: Jellyfish
When you are stung by a jellyfish, taking a whiz on the wound
eases the pain. "shut" means he'd like to piss on you, Mr. Roth, but
not in that situation, because it would better your life and ease your
pain.
Anyways, I want to answer him. If Mr. Roth's "ignorance is astounding",
there must be example of such ignorance that you found. Please cite
them and explain how they are ignorant. Then and only then, can anyone
debate anything. Otherwise, your post just becomes a drive-by
rationalization.
Next, "How can you disarm a country with weapons of mass destruction
and not feel at least a little ridiculous?"
Well, isn't this just a rigged a question? Is ridiculousness inherent
to weapons of mass destruction? Or, is it just inherent to disarming
people? Or perhaps, just in disarming terrorists?
March 17, 2003 at 15:37:34
Name: Eric
E-mail: er2535@yahoo.com
Subject: Question
In your gift shop, you recommend various movies and CDs, but
no books. What books, other than obviously Ayn Rand, do you recommend?
Editor's Note: You're right about Rand. Firstly, I'd recommend her The Fountainhead or Atlas Shrugged. Besides her, here are some other random books I liked: Troublemaker by Harry Wu; the third Harry Potter by J.K. Rowling; Radical Son by David Horowitz; Fighting Terrorism by Benjamin Netanyahu; The Shawshank Redemption: The Shooting Script by Frank Darabont (the notes in the back are great, especially the story about the Humane Society and the maggot); Outrage: The Five Reasons Why O.J. Simpson Got Away with Murder by Vincent Bugliosi; and from the "perpetually unfinished but interesting as hell" category: The Language Instinct by Steven Pinker. On a more intellectual level, I'm in the middle of the first GTO right now. (JR)
March 17, 2003 at 15:37:34
Name: shut
E-mail: i_miss_barbara_and_thats_lame@yahoo.com
Subject: the
Website: fuckupyouwhinigpussy.com
This post refers to: The "Peace" Pussies
thats right, shut the fuck up you whining pussy. Do you got
dirt on your skirt. I would not piss on you if you were stung by a
jellyfish, and I would enjoy taking a piss on you, believe me. You're one
human I would not save. You probably won't even E-mail me back you big
pussy. You're ignorance is astounding, I think it is the worse case I
have ever seen. Bush is a cunt, but you're a bigger one. People against
the war are pussies? Well I sure as fuck am not. I want you to tell me
why we're going to war. I don't know, Bush sure as fuck doesn't know. So
tell me. please. How can you disarm a country with weapons of mass
destruction and not feel at least a little ridiculous?
Editor's Note: You're right, I won't accept your double dare to e-mail you. I prefer to correspond with people who incorporate a small degree of intellectual content into what they say. Oh, and by the way, I believe the phrase is "I wouldn't piss on you if you were on fire." If that "jellyfish" part is your own unique twist, then you've succeeded in fucking up the one potentially creative aspect of your entire post. Congratulations. You are a complete failure. (JR)
March 16, 2003 at 23:52:31
Name: Christina
E-mail: computergeneratedjesus@yahoo.com
Subject: blaming the victim
"A true liberal, in a never-ending quest to shield the
"victim" from all responsibility for his or her own actions, would throw all
blame on the driver of the car."
This is from the rape on a bicycle article. I just have a quick
question. How come whenever I try to make the point that it just may have been
decades of really really BAD American foreign policy that came back to
bite us Americans in the ass on Sept. 11, 2001 (versus Saddam Hussein,
another fine example of BAD foreign policy), every one accuses me of
blaming the victim(s). But in something less substantial than multi/bi
lateral international politics...say, rape on a bicycle, my inability to
blame the victim becomes an example of whats wrong with people today.
Just wondering where the line is...getting raped because of your own
stupidity is one thing. Getting thousands of people killed because of your
own stupidity seems like something else entirely.
P.S. SAY NO TO WAR!
Editor's Note: It depends what you are blaming America for. For example, if you're blaming America for being rich, free, and capitalistic, and therefore pissing off those poor, innocent, Middle-Easterners into "defending themselves" against what they see as an aggressive, imperialist, rogue state, then I would say you're full of shit. If, however, you are blaming America for not wiping Saddam and his henchmen off the map years ago, then I would agree with you. Still, when I "blame the victim" for walking through Harlem at midnight in a sleazy outfit all by herself, it doesn't mean I don't think the rapists shouldn't have their balls cut off. (JR)
March 16, 2003 at 20:11:05
Name: Doug
Subject: a few questions
No, Mike. Our Prime Minister has done something. He sent the
rest of the Canadian Troops to Afghanistan. So, when Bush asks him to
head to Iraq, he can say ["that he already helped"? - Ed.]
If Chretien is going to be a dick, at least be a dick connected to a
pair of balls. At least tell Bush flat-out that he won't send Canadian
Troops to Iraq. But he won't do it. He's too busy "Legacy Building" to be
concerned about that place he once knew...what's that..oh yeah,
reality.
Not only is Jean Chretien massively evading a life and death moral
decision, he is doing it to appease both sides of political spectrum. To
Bush he says, "Can't help it!", to peace protesters he says, "See, I'm
with you guys!"
If the Liberals get re-elected I might spontaneously combust. Sigh...
Editor's Note: I like it: "If Chretien is going to be a dick, at least be a dick connected to a pair of balls." I think this line will live for generations. (JR)
March 13, 2003 at 21:11:06
Name: Tom
Subject: a few questions
Jason, I have a few questions which i hope you will answer
for me...
1. how many hits does 'save the humans' get each day?
2. have you considered putting a forum on the site?
3. and lastly, do you welcome us web surfers submitting content to be
put on your site? I'd love to see my thoughts and ideas put somewhere!
Thanks.
Editor's Note: Even though I have an ad for web stats at the bottom of this page, I've let the free trial expire and never bothered to sign up with another company. The page views per month were around 35-40k last time I checked. A lot of sites seem to be linking to this one lately, so maybe they're higher. As far as a forum, I thought about it at one point, but then decided any forum would be just as bad as the forums on most other sites. Anyway, people come to this site for what I say, not to hear themselves talk. (That doesn't mean I won't change my mind in the future.) And as to question #3, the answer is "yes" (see the "submissions" link at the top of the page), though most of what I receive is so boring I can't even finish reading it. Consider it an act of compassion that you don't see most of it. (JR)
March 13, 2003 at 05:17:54
Name: Mike McGregor
E-mail: incedious@hfx.eastlink.ca
Subject: Applause !!!
I couldn't agree with you more. I think we need to take a
hands on approach at this War on Terrorism. I am from Canada and have felt rage at the Assholes responsible for Sept. 11 as much as any American has. I read many of the posts on this site and stand to Applaud you. I especially would like to donate money to having my initials on a bomb as well (as my government seems to be bending over and doing nothing).
One thing I think that should be done is to screw over one of the organizations that is supposed to be there for our benefit. The USA or any country for that matter should not have to look to the UN for approval for a war. Here in lies the problem.... did Uncle Bin ask the UN for permission to fly a plane into two of the tallest buildings in the world ? Didn't think so... return the favor !!! Enough ranting from a Pissed off Canuck !!!
Bookmarked for future reference.
Mike McGregor
Halifax, Nova Scotia, Canada
March 13, 2003 at 02:00:53
Name: Sarah
E-mail: spottsis@aol.com
Subject: Personal Ad
Wow, what an ad. What girl wouldn't fall in love after the first paragraph.
March 12, 2003 at 18:06:56
Name: A. Kat
E-mail: tookoolkat@yahoo.com
Subject: quite funny
I liked yer little "25 things Objectivists Might Say During
Sex" list. I am a fan of Rand but that certainly doesn't mean I can't
take a good joke and I think the poor old lady herself might have gotten
a good chuckle out of it if she wasn't dead.
The truth has nothing to fear from satire. Keep it up.
Editor's Note: First of all, she probably wouldn't have liked it; it's too vulgar. Second, I really need to explain something. It's not "satire", it's "parody". Parody uses a topic as a vehicle for humor, not as a target of the humor. Satire uses humor to attempt to point out absurdity or falsehoods in the topic itself. Satirizing truth is dishonest; parodying it makes fun of the one doing the parodying, in this case, a fictional first-person speaker. (JR)
March 11, 2003 at 03:23:33
Name: john
Subject: this website sucks
your website is boring and dull. do us all a favour and fuck off. thanks.
Editor's Note: Don't those British schools teach you how to express yourself? I'd really like to know what was so "boring and dull" that it compelled you to tell me to fuck off. (JR)
March 10, 2003 at 22:16:01
Name: Doug
Subject: The Pope?
Send the Pope to Iraq? I guess he was gonna die soon anyway.
March 8, 2003 at 21:01:57
Name: Niffer
Subject: human targets
Dear Human Targets,
You guys are defending the Devil. You're over there standing up in front of your own country saying you're against us. You're defending a man who kills children's parents right in front of their eyes. How can you feel good about yourself, how do you wake in the morning and look at yourself in the mirror? Do you guys honestly believe that if you defend a man who kills people for fun that you're going to go to heaven? You have a great country that gives you the freedom to turn your back on us and defend another country. do you think that if you were born in iraq they would let you come to america to defend us against them? They wouldn't, they would kill you before they let that happen. Turn to God, he's the only one that will help right now in the world. stop defending the Devil.
Editor's Note: You had me until that "God" stuff. We don't need God. We need big fucking bombs. (JR)
March 7, 2003 at 23:39:33
Name: Jessica
Subject: A New Breed of Discrimination
I am not sure hw to phrase this without sounding conceited or egotistical, but frankly I don't care since I am a bit of both. There is a new form of discrimination in our country. It has personally affected me and several of my friends, and we will no longer tolerate it. This new breed of hate comes in the form of discrimination against beautiful people. Two separate incidents that occurred just today validate this opinion. Incident number one occurred when I was talking to a good friend of mine. His overprotective, insecure girlfriend told him that she "didn't like him talking to pretty girls" and pulled him away from our conversation. An argument of course ensued about how he can talk to any of his friends whenever he damn well pleases. This would not have happened if I were not a good looking person. If I were a walking genetic flaw who pretended not to give a shit about my appearance, I would have been able to finish the conversation without a hassle.
Incident number two occurred as I was doing my grocery shopping. A man approached me and told me that if he were a woman and looked the way I did, he would not walk around wearing what I was wearing. (I replied that if he were a woman and looked the way I did that he probably wouldn't leave the house). Keep in mind that I wasn't dressed inappropriately in the least... a tee and khaki shorts that covered more than enough of my body. I hate people that give opinions when you don't ask for them. I did not solicit this ignorant man's opinion, but somehow I had to listen to it anyway. What he basically said was that if I were morbidly obese and grossly deformed, I was somehow more entitled to this outfit. Since I am a pretty woman, my right to wear shorts has suddenly been revoked. I live in Florida! Give me a break.
People assume that if a person LOOKS good that it is the only thing they have going for them. You have no idea how many times I have been underestimated because of my appearance. I am a professional woman who holds down a steady job and pulls in a very hefty paycheck. I do believe that it is important to look good in our society, but people need to not make harsh assumptions based on ridiculous stereotypes. I know that this hasn't been one of my more profound posts, but I felt like venting after a hard day. Please forgive any grammatical or spelling errors. Also forgive the fact that none of the above made any coherent sense. I need some sleep... it's been a rough week.
- LOVE JESSICA
Editor's Note: Don't worry about spelling. If I like you, you get a free spell check. (I also have trouble with "occurred".) Let's first get something straight. That man should have thanked you. I will, since you're owed it: "thank you". Actually, those are two interesting examples. The question is: are they related? I think so, and I think the common denominator is a lack of self esteem. When the girlfriend got pissed, it's clear that she's afraid she doesn't have enough to keep her boyfriend interested. I.e. don't take a child to a candy store, because he's gonna want some candy. As far as the sex-fearing man, he is the kid in the candy store. But he ain't got any money. (JR)
March 7, 2003 at 21:45:09
Name: John Smith
E-mail: hannibalsmith@hotmail.com
Subject: Halle and the Juke followers
It is my belief that Juke is a criminology term, from an
outdated theory that all criminal behavior could be tracked genetically to
a single pair. The couple were dubbed with a last name of "Juke". If
anybody has actually taken the time to look up the Jukes and want to
bitch about my history lesson, suck it. I am not a criminologist, and could
care less about the accuracy of the story. Rather, I retract my slur
and replace it with a more direct cultivation of my anger: "...and these
fucking savage puppets of the entertainment industry are still..." To
make things clear, the slur was not a racial one, color is not a crisis
for me. The slur was just to denote that I thought the idiocy of the
arguments should be labeled criminal. Thanks again. And I take that as a
compliment that you agree.
Editor's Note: Glad we cleared that up. When I typed in "juke" into Yahoo, I got a lot of blues and Creole music sites, so I wasn't sure what the hell it meant. (JR)
March 7, 2003 at 03:24:33
Name: John Smith
E-mail: hannibalsmith@hotmail.com
Subject: Halle the Great
I'm dumfounded. Months have passed since Miss Berry received
the award and these fucking savage jukes are still writing in to complain about the article. I tried to stay away, and let it die, but I can't.
Let's face the facts. Nobody gives a fuck if a good actor happens to be black, or happens, god forbid, to be white. When you fucking ignorant
pro-minority bitches get done with your imaginary war on the white man, let me know so we can have a calm and intellectually reasonable commentary on the success of this nation in completely tossing reason into the wind. Those of you who support affirmative action ought to be taken to
Iraq and chained to the missile silos. If anybody holds back the blacks or hispanics or whoever from attainment, it's you. By lowering standards in order to reach equal numbers, you don't challenge equality, you challenge NUMBERS. Nobody gives a fuck if every company in the world has 90% blacks in upper management, as long as it's due to affirmative action. If I was a black man, I know I wouldn't want to tell my friends and family that I just cracked open a great job pulling 6 figures, if I also had to admit that I would never have gotten the job if it weren't for affirmative action. That there were 50 white guys more qualified than me and out of pity, a nation full of deceptive pussies gave me a handout. Give me a fucking break. You want a list of awful actors that aren't black? Here you go.....French Stewart, Keanu Reeves, George Clooney, Nicolas Cage, Liv Tyler, Pamela Anderson, Jean Claude VanDamm, (granted he's not an oscar powerhouse or anything but shit, he has like 50 films) Sylvester Stalone, J. Lo,......the list is forever long. I'd rather see Denzel Washington doing a remake of Casa Blanca any day to the bullshit these people throw out. But am I racist to think that someone who is white does it better? NO! Washington is the only black actor who could pull weight the way that Harrison Ford can. Do I want to see Halle Berry on the same stage as Harrison Ford? Absolutely not. I don't care if she
is a quarter Arab,a quarter Italian, a quarter Hispanic, an eighth Native American and an eighth African American. For that matter, if she was 100% white cracker trailer park trash, it doesn't make a shit to me. To say that she is in the same league with such legends is ludicrous.
And these ridiculous comments about victories for blacks......what victories? What battle? Only the ignorant say that blacks are somehow less than whites. I'm so proud of you for fighting the KKK......real white people laugh at those inbred redneck mother fuckers. confident Black
people should too. All that aside, what is worse is that Berry wants me to believe that, like other actors, she finally convinced an arbitrary board that she deserves a piece of metal and a title and that it's special because she is black? It means less to see that award in the hands of a
white individual? The entire award is ridiculous whether a black woman or white woman holds it and cries. It essentially ensures you'll get another opportunity to bust your ass to line the pockets of the film industry later. christ, if you want an arbitrary piece of paper, do what I do. Attend a university.
Editor's Note: I'm not familiar with the term "juke". If it means what I think it does, the integrity of the rest of your comments (which I agree with) goes straight down the toilet. (JR)
March 5, 2003 at 02:22:44
Name: Shawn Wagler
Subject: Human Targets
I'm just glad that there are still individuals out there
willing to sacrifice themselves for the good of the world. Not only to help rid the world of defective genes, but also to make it easier for U.S. pilots to hit their targets now that certain Iraqi military targets are now conveniently marked with bright multi-colored tie-dye t-shirts (pun
intended).
March 4, 2003 at 15:36:07
Name: Hobbesian_Cat
Subject: Rape and bicycles
Ah, yet another spittle-flecked screed from the electronic
pen of the ever-so-subtle and nuanced Mr. Roth. Way to be an apologist
for rapists, fool. Your "c'mon, she was KIND OF asking for it," argument
is laughable at best; sociopathic at worst. Are you really as shrill
and brittle as your writing makes you seem, hugging your knees to your
chest as you rock back and forth, all the while ranting against the
"liberal media?" Don't quit your day job just yet, pal.
Editor's Note: "Yet another"? Are you masochistic or obsessive-compulsive? There's no way you could read that piece and call me an "apologist for rapists" without being completely honest in your own mind about your own dishonesty. I applaud you for being so in touch with your inner scumbag. (JR)
March 4, 2003 at 12:35:46
Name: parentofrealkids
Subject: Anti-drug
Good points but you mainly focused on the parents. You still
made it sound like it's the parent's fault if kids do drugs. (My kids
have never done drugs but they've been into their share of nonsense) The
anti-drug commercials I hate are the ones that say "Talk to your kids.
They'll listen." So all you have to do is talk and they'll listen, huh?
Just like magic. The person who wrote those stupid commercials
obviously does not have have any kids over the age of 1 year.
Editor's Note: Don't know what made you think I implied it's the parents' fault. They do have an influence, though. And I need to correct one thing about what you wrote. In the future, you should say "I don't think my kids have ever done drugs." You have no way of knowing for sure. They sure as hell aren't going to come home one day and say, "Guess what, mom? Johnny had the thickest blunt. Holy shit, did we get fucked up!" (JR)
March 1, 2003 at 16:49:42
Name: Jessica
Subject: Liberal Jihad
So glad someone sees it my way. I have been verbally
attacking these left-wing liberals for what seems like forever, but the
only respose I have recieved is that I must be some sort of heartless
bitch who wants to see children die. (None of the previous response is
coherent of effective. It is the intellectual equivalent of saying
"yeah... well... uh... you're fat!" Not very true or hurtful, and quite
immature, but I digress.)
Where are all of the conservative cowboys? Why does the majority
of today's society consider it "wrong" to be on the right side of the
fence? I thought that this country was founded on the principles of
democracy and debate, not "see it my way or I force-feed you some anti-war
propaganda with picture of homeless middle eastern family included." I
don't necessarily agree with all opinions, but I do agree that we are at
least entitled to them.
One tactic used by anti-war protestors that you forgot to include
in the editorial is the "innocent" terrorist approach. If I hear one
more new-age hippie wannabe spouting inane psycho-babble about how people
like Saddam and his terrorist regime just don't know any better, I'll
take my own form of military action on his or her ass.
Everyone wants a peaceful world, but not everyone is ignorant
enough to think that it can be achieved by sitting on our collective
behind. We have to get up and fight for what we want, or else let the
terrorists win. I will continue to fight this anti-war jihad. I can promise
you that I will ride into battle (taking all of those liberties that we
as Americans are entitled to) listening to my punk rock and drinking a
slurpee from a triple splitz-o cup.
Editor's Note: You ask: "Why does the majority of today's society consider it "wrong" to be on the right side of the fence?" Good question. The answer is that the only moral defense of the war against Iraq (and terrorism in general) is one based on self-interest. Most conservatives are (usually religious) altruists, and therefore are deathly afraid of being labeled "selfish". That's why they resort to ridiculous excuses for fighting this war. E.g., "to liberate the people of Iraq". Jesus, do they sound full of shit when they say that. Keep on fighting - and slurping. (JR)
March 1, 2003 at 10:31:06
Name: David Buchner
Subject: anti-racist racists
> And I do like (the original) Star Trek. (JR)
Excellent choice.
I'm eager to see how you convey anything pornographic in a 16X16 (?)
icon.
(re:chocolate milk) Nail on the head, again. There is no better word
than "racist" for the belief that a person who is 1/64 "black" and 63/64
"white" is a "black." The logic seems to be that a molecule of black
"contamination" is enough to make the whole thing Black. It's been so
long since I had to confront a "real" (old-fashioned) racist, with all
these contradictory, allegedly anti-racist racists running around - it
would be refreshing to face a straighforward, ignorant racist moron like
Archie Bunker.
Editor's Note: Looks like the favicon people have their online editor disabled. Oh well, I guess no pornographic browser icons for now. (JR)
March 1, 2003 at 10:31:06
Name: Michael Spitler
E-mail: spitlermike@surewest.net
Subject: Err, I was only kidding about the killin'
Still, the voluntary human shields should get whats coming to 'em.
Sometimes I get carried away. Must be the violent videogames I play
for hours on end...
*Twitch*
Editor's Note: I know. But if some other psycho gunned down Mike Farrell and George Clooney, I wanted to be on the record as having disapproved. (Especially since I always liked Farrell as B.J. He was no Alan Alda, but let's give him some credit here.) Like I said, if people like this are hanging out on some Iraqi bridge to get in our way, then bomb's away. They'll find out quickly that humans don't make very good shields. (JR)
February 28, 2003 at 19:07:05
Name: Michael Spitler
E-mail: spitlermike@surewest.net
Subject: another thing...
I just had a thought, why don't we all follow Jason Roth's
example and do prank e-mails on places like the International Action Center and stuff. We could give him transcripts of the results by forwarding him copies of the messages we send and send him copies of their responses. (So he can be confident of their authenticity) Perhaps some would
be funny enough to add to the E-tarded E-mail section.
Just a thought.
Editor's Note: If they're funny, I'll post 'em. (JR)
February 28, 2003 at 03:11:01
Name: Michael Spitler
E-mail: spitlermike@surewest.net
Subject: The Holy War against the America Haters!
Hell Yes! Ill start tomorrow, by defacing and tearing up as
many signs against the coming war as I can. I already have my first target in mind, a paper accusing Bush of being a mass murderer.
Take no prisoners, and leave no one alive!
Muhahahaha!!!
Now please excuse me while I send threatening Email to the
International Action Centers website!
Editor's Note: Congratulations, you've made the first post that's forced me to write something for legal reasons. Of course, I know you're only talking about writing letters and arguing with anti-war people. But for the record: in no way do I advocate either vandalism or the intentional killing of anyone, even anti-war protesters. Unless, of course, they happen to be sitting under our bombs as "human shields" in Iraq. (JR)
February 28, 2003 at 03:04:19
Name: Gloria
E-mail: glow301@msn.com
Subject: WHAT!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
This idiot does not have a clue what he is talking about.
How can he even insinuate that Halle did not deserve this award when he
hasn't even seen the movie? He says that it is not a question if she
deserved it. But that is exactly what his long pointless article is
saying.
To ignore the fact that Halle represents all the women before her and
along side her in this victory would be to deny who and what she is. She
is a beautiful and talented black woman who had the privilege of
accepting an award that has been denied to people of color for years. She
deserves it for her performance, her talented career and her people.
So she's half white. Okay, thanks for that information, as if we didn't
know that already. But pointing it out in the manner that this reject
did, only stands to take away respect that is owed to her and all our
women of color. Her winning this award creates a platform that we never
had. Half white/half black, Hispanic, whatever. That is not the point.
She is a few shades darker than what Hollywood and history has chosen to
recognize and reward. Does he really need to look back in history? You
think that racist pigs like himself cared that she was half white. She
is still the wrong color. Her being acknowledged by the Academy and her
peers proved to be a step in the right direction. Away from the people
and ideas that say minority people only get ahead because of their
color (affirmative action) and instead of their abilities and talents. Yes
this was a victory for Halle because she represents all the faces of
color that have been rejected for so long, but also and most importantly
because the woman can act. Has he seen anything she has done? I doubt
it! He says "everyone" can be rightly skeptical of Halle's award, but
"everyone" is not. When you look at those faces watching her accept the
award, and when you hear the way people in their homes were moved, it
makes you question whether "everyone" are just the people and voices he
hears in his head, because most people who look at that evening think
the award was deserved and sincerely appreciated for all it meant for her
and all people.
Then the prick wants to call her psychotic in her speech. "Psychotic
breakdown of joy"? What the hell is he talking about! That has to be one
of the most moving and inspirational speeches I have ever heard. I do
not stand alone when I say that that night was a long time coming, 74
years to be exact. She was right on point to acknowledge the fact that
this victory was not her own. Her speech was humble and sincere. Has this
man ever been so moved and overjoyed for anything in his miserable,
ignorant life?
Reading the article this man wrote just goes to show that there are
still ignorant people out there that choose to still be obstacles in our
march for equality. Yes equality! Despite what this man might say that
opportunities are quail Hollywood. Hello! Denzel Washington in "Malcolm
X". Who the hell deserved it more than him? You tell me who? That is
evidence enough for the most reasonable person. That is not to say we
have not come a long way but there is still a while to go. And we as a
people will not stop working hard to make victories like Halle's a normal
and equal event in all career choices.
Editor's Note: If a woman is half black and half white, why is she considered a "black woman"? Oh, wait, here's a theory. Maybe it's sort of like chocolate milk. No matter how little chocolate you put in your milk, you could still get away with calling it "chocolate milk". Even if someone looks at the milk and says, "Hey, what the fuck is that? That's not chocolate milk." And you say, "Aha! I got you! I put chocolate in there. You don't see it, but it's there. Therefore, this is chocolate milk. So fuck you." But here's the flaw in that theory. I think to be a black person, you need to be the chocolate syrup, not the milk. This reminds me of when Archie Bunker called himself "black" after a blood transfusion from a black person. From now on, I'm referring to him as "Archie Bunker: Black civil rights leader." (JR)
February 28, 2003 at 00:41:21
Browse older messages in our previous reader comment archive.
To make your own post, please visit the main comment page.
|
Back to: home 10,000 frenchmen
|
|