|
Comments, Love Letters, and Death Threats
Comment Archive 14
The posts below were made from August 23, 2003 to November 12, 2003.
You can also visit our previous comment archive, containing messages from July 1, 2003 to August 18, 2003.
To make a post, please visit the main comment page.
Name: benito
Website: libertypunk.blogspot.com
Subject: classifieds
"Young Japanese girl look for friend in New York City for
while. Would like you to get me on top of your Empire Building. Would
also like you help me ride your train below."
I love this one. Some funny shatze.
Editor's Note: Shatze? If you say so. (JR)
November 12, 2003 at 19:24:49
Name: geoff
Website: libertypunk.blogspot.com
Subject: the bus beating video
Jesus Christ, those were some tight pants. The beating
itself was okay, but because my view of it was frequently obstructed by the
other stupid kids on the bus, I have to give it a C+.
I just want to know why the bus driver didn't reprimand that girl with
the pants. That ass could've distracted the other kids from the
old-style pummeling that was going on, and hey, they have to learn somehow.
Editor's Note: The amazing thing is that I don't think I'd even want to see an adult woman wearing those pants. They looked painful, for Christ's sake. (JR)
November 12, 2003 at 10:53:42
Name: Doug
E-mail: dhaze048@uotawa.ca
Subject: Christmas
Here in Ottawa, as I entered the Rideau Center, there were
Christmas trees up and lights sparkling in a thirty foot long Sears
display.
It was October 28th.
I miss the good old days where people were publicly lynched for being
distasteful and idiotic---not to mention extremely lazy. I can imagine
the Sears board meeting:
"Let's just skip Halloween and cut straight to the Xmas!"
It seems that if it's not laziness, it's greed (the short term, range
of the moment kind). Do businesses really think they can get a bigger
Christmas haul if they put up their lights earlier and earlier? If
anything, as you imply Jason --- they only take what little sparks of soul
the holidays have left, and extinguish them.
I want to say, "You gotta get in touch with the true meaning of
Christmas", but that's become such a cliché; its lost all meaning.
But somewhere, there's something special that makes this holiday. Kids
know what it is. And it isn't the "YAAY! I'm going to get shit!"
feeling.
It's a feeling of child-like innocence and goodwill. But it's also not
just a feeling. It's a celebration of man's capabilities --- that not
only can we support ourselves, but that most of us have the wealth to
afford to give gifts to people we care about, without discomforting
ourselves --- and to the contrary --- enjoy the giving, because we know what
makes the giving possible: productivity.
Christmas is really about celebrating being alive. This season is not
about how many colored lights there are on your house, or how many times
you hear "Jingle Bell Rock" and cringe, while browsing through the
mall, it isn't about feeling sorry (or for that matter, guilty) for the
less fortunate, it isnąt about the snow on the ground, or hell, even the
damn Christmas tree, and it certainly isn't about making sacrifices.
It's about recognizing that happiness on earth requires no sacrifices.
Most of us are presented with a choice between "light the advent
candle" religious blow-out or uber-materialistic nihilism. But it doesnąt
have to be that way. You donąt have to be religious to be spiritual, and
you donąt have to be superficial to give presents, nor do you have to
give presents to be happy. If the only thing one can do is be unhappy at
the way Christmas is celebrated by most people --- then simply forget
them, and focus on the positive things in one's own life.
Editor's Note: You can't deny that a huge part of a child's feeling about Christmas is "Yaay! I'm going to get shit!" That's at least half of what Christmas means to a child. At least, it was to me. The other half of Christmas is getting together with family, in the days when you're incapable of seeing all their flaws. It really sounds like you're rewriting the definition of Christmas. But I'm ok with that. (JR)
November 11, 2003 at 16:49:34
Name: Rachel
Subject: christmas
Bah Humbug to you! While i happen to agree with you that
the marketing of x-mas has completely gotten out of control, and that all
stores care about is what holiday decorations they can hock next - i
disagree with you that it has lost all meaning. If you happen to have a
family that you don't get along with, or don't care that much about -
then i can see it being a torturous affair. But, if you have a family
that you actually enjoy seeing and you only get to see them at x-mas
because everyone lives all over the country, then x-mas is a time for
warm fuzzyness. I enjoy the warmth that the holiday season brings out in
people, all that good cheer is actually infectious. And no, religion
has no part in it for me - none, nada, zip. I celebrate Christmas as
a family get together and a chance to do some nice things for people
you love. That doesn't mean i don't make fun of those idiots with
the inflatable Santas & Snowmen on their lawns too... I just don't let
it overshadow what the holidays mean to me.
Editor's Note: I'm not against getting together with people you love. I'm just not sure what you're describing is "Christmas". On the other hand, I guess you could say "10,000 Christmas celebrators can be wrong", meaning that you're one of 10,000 who celebrates is correctly. (JR)
November 11, 2003 at 13:09:20
Name: David Buchner
E-mail: buchner@wcta.net
Website: customer.wcta.net/buchner/turtdex.html
Subject: Toilet Seats
Jason,
You asked "are these things really consistent with our Republic
government?"
This may have become a minor point in this age, but it's one that's
bugged me through the whole Recall story. ARI made the same point as you.
And I agree: democracy is creepy -- I mean, just LOOK at most people
you meet! Do you want them deciding everything on a whim? Yuck.
BUT we're not talking about the USA, we're talking about just one of
the "S"es. California could have a totally mobocratic government, or they
could make all their decisions based on astrology (oh wait, that's how
it is now) ...and as I understand the original "United States"
conception of this nation - as a federation of sovereign States - that would
have been just dandy. California wouldn't have to have "our" Republican
form of government, would it? Not internally, anyway.
People like you and I, who grew up watching Captain Marvel and Almighty
Isis and going to public schools, have a hard time relating to this
idea. Well, I do, anyway. It seems contrary to the pyramid organizational
chart we memorized: of an ever-largering hierarchy of governments, from
city council on up to the King...er, President. The Federal Government
is the "Best One!" - top of the heap - the SuperGovernment. We're so
used to the Federal having unlimited power over Everything, and the
Several States as just a convenient administrative scheme for local areas -
that the original idea seems foreign and "radical."
I imagine this conception of gov't makes it much easier for some to go
for the idea of the UN being just the Next Level On The Chart: a
SuperDuperGovernment. It's logical - in a simple, rationalistic,
take-a-premise-and-run-with-it way.
So anyway, I have a hard time seeing California's whim-of-the-majority
tendencies as a threat to the Republic. You'd never see me living
there, though.
Glad you like my turtles.
Editor's Note: You're probably right. I'm just glad you didn't use the phrase "states' rights". (Damn Republicans.) (JR)
November 11, 2003 at 07:53:21
Name: phoenix
E-mail: phoenix@alephnulldimension.net
Website: alephnulldimension.net
Subject: idea and site criticism
idea: how bout a page that flashes for a few seconds that is
a pic of a baby (maybe a crack baby) with a gun to its head with the
caption: visit this site or the baby gets it!
criticism:
you seem to be pretty anti-politcally correct. for example, you make
light of being mentally crippled, bums who's job it is to hold up the
walls of liquor stores, and suggest or imply that women who dress like a
slut wanting to get raped want to get raped. yet you don't make light
of 9/11 or people dying to "defend our freedom" or "defend our
existence." what gives? if you're really PinC, shouldn't you make fun of
9/11, too? what kind of PinC person are you anyway? couldn't you make a
case that a woman deserving to get raped is like america deserving to
get attacked by saying america doing whatever pisses those people off is
like a bike rider wearing black at night?
Editor's Note: America getting attacked on September 11 is more like a bicyclist wearing red in the middle of the day and encountering some fucking psychopath in a beat-up Pinto who wants to run over everything in red. (JR)
November 10, 2003 at 22:31:51
Name: phoenix
E-mail: phoenix@alephnulldimension.net
Website: alephnulldimension.net
Subject: fistfuck issue
this is in response to the below exchange.
how about continuing to perform the fistfuck punishment but when they
ask what you're doing, just call it "fist making love?"
in fact, if we called rape making love and talked about how often
people make love with people they are already acquanted with or how often
people make love on college campuses, then that will make them feel all
warm and fuzzy and they'd never think about raping someone.
Editor's Note: I'm not sure if that would work, but we could at least improve the rapists' self esteem. (JR)
November 10, 2003 at 04:28:52
Name: Michael
E-mail: spitler_mike@surewest.net
Subject: Propositions
Propositions are mob rule democracy, but I vote in
them anyways. It's either I vote or the mob gets their way. But they got
their way anyways in the last election...
Sometimes though, I think that people use better judgement on the
propositions than the politicians use making laws. It goes to show just how
fucked up my state government is that the mob usually makes better
decisions than they do.
I think I will start a proposition were I get to torch Berkley and burn
that cesspool of multiculturism to the ground. Yea or Nea?
I like living in California, it is just the government I can't stand.
And Berkley.
November 10, 2003 at 04:03:56
Name: Oh_my_god
Subject: What is this site???
I thought this site was supposed to be a porn site or
something.My friend recommended it at such.What happened and why did you
change it?????
Editor's Note: Your friend was fucking with you. (My kind of person.) (JR)
November 9, 2003 at 18:52:35
Name: U_Gay
E-mail: pleasedie@eatshit.com
Subject: Fuck you
Could you make the website a lil bland???
Isn't this supposed to be hard hitting or some shite.
Editor's Note: pleasebeintelligible@youfuckingmoron.org (JR)
November 9, 2003 at 04:32:31
Name: David Buchner
E-mail: buchner@wcta.net
Website: customer.wcta.net/buchner/turtdex.html
Subject: Toilet Seats
About the comedianettes: "They assume this because a good
chunk of the world's female population. . . . is actually incensed when
they need to put the goddamn toilet seat down all by themselves. "
This is the part I was not-getting. I've only encountered females with
this complaint a couple of times -- and both refused to explain why
they felt so put out by it. What is the big deal about which configuration
it's left in? Is one somehow more the "default" than others? Are these
people simply arrested at a certain level of mental development, and
assume that the whole world ought to be focused on their convenience? If
they share a car with somebody shorter than them, do they have the same
attitude about the seat and mirror positions?
"Sometimes, a fortunate byproduct of courtesy can be perceived
meanness."
No kidding. I doubt many people will understand, but that is so often
true that it deserves some investigation.
Editor's Note: I think your assessment of women who hate putting toilet seats down is correct. I only sympathize with their argument if it's their home and a male guest leaves the seat up. But if she bitches to her own husband/boyfriend, then tell her it won't kill her to bend her knees once in a while. BTW, those turtle photos of yours are so cute, they almost make me want to piss sitting down. (JR)
November 8, 2003 at 08:02:00
Name: David Buchner
E-mail: buchner@wcta.net
Website: customer.wcta.net/buchner
Subject: Alcohol Article
Goddamn! I wish I could be like John. I wish I could get an
alcohol assignment.
Editor's Note: I'm guessing he didn't have to review beer, unfortunately. Nor do I suspect the teacher asked him to report on "why drinking isn't as bad as society tells you it is". (JR)
November 7, 2003 at 09:23:22
Name: libertarian kat
E-mail: plath81@yahoo.com
Subject: making it a homepage
JR - Thanks for your response to my first post...the woman
suing for problems caused by breast implants would make for a hilarious
but much-needed film. I just wanted to add that it has become my mission
to make savethehumans.com the homepage for as many computers as I can
in the computer labs and library at my bleeding heart quasi-marxist
college (which lacks diversity in professors --all liberal anti-war wimps--
while it stands for diversity in race and all that kind of crap.
They'll 'tolerate' anything but an anti-liberal view...damn hypocrites) I
don't think I'll make it to all of the computers, but I will try my very
hardest. I might use the banners to set as backgrounds too.
Editor's Note: Don't get too bummed out about your college. It's nothing a little healthy revolution won't cure. (JR)
November 5, 2003 at 12:11:22
Name: Michael
E-mail: spitlermike@surewest.net
Subject: Heck, I wouldn't vote for her either.
I agree with you totally on what you said about why you
aren't voting. I think you said a while back that we should have an "I
abstain" added to ballots for those who hate all the canidates, and don't
want to give anyone their vote.
I felt kinda like that too in our little recall election in California,
but at least I had some propositions to vote on. (And I finally decided
on McClintock.) There was that one which would approve some spending on
"infrastructure" which I voted against since given our state's
financial problems, where the fuck is all that money going to come from? I did
vote for that proposition that would prohibit the government from
gathering racial data, but unfortunately not all of California's voters are
as enlightened as I, so it didn't pass.
I voted for McClintock but obviously I didn't get what I wanted in that
case either. It kinda ticked me off that all the Republicans rallied
behind some middle of the roader moderate, because apparently winning is
more important than being consistent. Oh god this state seems so
fucked up to me sometimes. Even most of the Republicans are closet
liberals!
I think that I may have a solution to the problem of no abstaining
option being available in most ballots, though. Perhaps we could all write
"I abstain" in the write-in section of the ballot. They have to count
it by law, right? Or maybe we could just pick up our ballots and hand
them in blank back to the official. If they bitch, tell them that it
is just your little way of saying you don't want to give any of those
pompous little bitches your sanction by voting.
Maybe I should move if it gets any worse. What is New York like?
Editor's Note: You won't want to move to NY for political reasons (it's also liberal), but it's still the best place to live. (Or you can live right outside NYC in NJ, where I am.) On the subject of propositions: Are these things really consistent with our Republic government? On one hand, I like the idea of private citizens making decisions rather than politicians, but on the other hand, it sounds a lot like mob-rule Democracy to me. (JR)
November 4, 2003 at 21:02:43
Name: Muizz
Subject: BOOOO!!!!!!!
YOU IDIOTS!!!!!!! THAT IS THE WORST CONTENT I HAVE EVER SEEN
IN MY WHOLE LIFE,AND WITHOUT GOING DOWN TO YOUR LEVEL,SAVE THE
HUMANS.COM SUCKS!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Editor's Note: I take it, then, that you will not be back. It's good to see that our automatic all-caps, multiple-exclamation point user elimination processes are all functioning properly. (JR)
November 4, 2003 at 16:16:58
Name: Michelle
Subject: anal sex rant
Why couldn't a man like ass and still not want any other
dicks and balls in a room where his is visible? And do you really want the
president to be in charge of the distribution of pussy? This is just
stupid and meaningless. I've been reading this site for a long time and
I know you can do better than this.
Editor's Note: No,I don't really want the president to be in charge of pussy distribution. I think you need to read this site a little longer. (Obviously, I would appoint a Secretary of Pussy Distribution, who would report to the Executive Senatorial Committee for the Propagation of Pussy. I spent a few seconds trying to think of an amusing four-letter acronym, but I couldn't get past "Congressional Undersecretary".) (JR)
November 2, 2003 at 20:38:49
Name: benito
Subject: Buchner's post/Communists
This is somewhat related to Buchner's recent post about that
god-damned annoying "parking lot" song written by that leftist creep
Joni Mitchell. Ever notice that leftist Commies hate it when other people
make money besides them? They preach to their gullible young masses
that money isn't important,etc. meanwhile selling millions of albums,
getting rich, etc., and still criticizing any poor bastard who tries to
make money by buiding a fucking store with a parking lot.
There is a radio station of the East coast here called WFMU. The
station manager, and the deejays are all very commie-ish people with trust
funds and broken unfullfilled dreams of artistic stardom. But they
implore, in fact demand harshly that their "unwashed masses" of listeners
send them money. That station makes close to a million dollars a year. The
deejays are all volunteer (they don't need money due to the trust funds
that their 'evil' parents set up for them).It's just revolting.
Editor's Note: I don't know if that's true about the FMU DJs, but I will say that their appeals for money (like a PBS telethon) can be pretty annoying. These "non-profit" types take pride in the fact that they can't make money, but when I listen to Oldies 101.1, at least no one ever asks me to send in a check. They just tell me about the latest hair replacement technique or diet pill then get back to the goddamn Chuck Berry. (JR)
November 2, 2003 at 12:45:10
Name: David Buchner
E-mail: buchner@wcta.net
Website: customer.wcta.net/buchner
Subject: headlines and other recent stuff
States Try to Force EPA to Regulate CO2
California first state to impose fine on people who exhale
My favorite, funny, and makes me think of a t-shirt design. I'm not
sure what exactly - how about: "I'm emitting CO2 right now - try and stop
me!"? Or "I've been emitting CO2 all day! Doesn't that just make you
furious you hippie puke? Now I'm going to go get back in my Hummer and
drive back and forth through a river!"
*-I think it might be fun to compile a list of "Technophobes with
websites." Most of my links are old, but I've kept track of a few.
*-Have you encountered a lot of men who hate small dogs?
*-I had a sheltered childhood (and adulthood, too). What is the deal
with toilet seats anyway? I've heard those comedians and never quite
understood the basis of the complaint. I ask you because you are so wise
and cosmopolitan, and must have more knowledge than I as you used three
"People Whose Funerals Deserve Low Attendance" on it.
Editor's Note: I'll answer the last two: (1) Yes, a lot of guys give me the "I hate small dogs" line. I think I've heard it from a woman, but it's rare. The joke is the same every time: something about the dog being a wannabe cat. I will admit that seeing a full grown person walking a tiny dog is a rather absurd site, but that's not the goddamn dog's fault. (2) Re. the "toilet seat" line, many female comedians assume that a guy leaving the toilet seat up after he takes a leak is an amusing subject for comedy. They assume this because a good chunk of the world's female population (the chunk that has indoor plumbing) is actually incensed when they need to put the goddamn toilet seat down all by themselves. Personally, I always put down both the seat and the lid. Let the woman pick up the lid, she can probably use the exercise. (However, I put down the seat and lid to be courteous, not to be mean. Sometimes, a fortunate byproduct of courtesy can be perceived meanness.) (JR)
October 31, 2003 at 15:09:24
Name: Emily Erickson
Subject: Rape and Bicycles
I think your comparison between a provocatively dressed woman being
raped and a person dressed in black being hit by a bicycle a horrible
comparison. Those are two completely different things. Most likely if
someone is hit at night while riding their bicycle, it was an accident.
The person in the car did not mean to hit the bicyclist. The man who
raped the woman, meant to rape the women. It wasn't an accident. In
both situations, the woman and the bicyclist made bad decisions. The
woman was not at all responsible for the rape. If the bicyclist was hit
on purpose, then s/he would not be the slightest bit responsible
either.
Also-I'm pretty sure feminist don't say that "pictures of nude women
cause rape." Pornography that makes violence sexual contribute to a
rape culture. And not all pornography does that.
If you believe that women bring a rape onto themselves at least you can
think of a stronger argument than what you have.
Editor's Note: My comments made it clear that I was comparing the woman to the bicyclist. I wasn't comparing the automobile driver who hits the bicyclist with the rapist. In the latter comparison, it is true that the driver does not deserve the same moral judgment as the rapist. Putting one's self in harm's way, whether the harm may come from a vehicle or a rapist, is one's own choice and responsibility. I hope I don't have to prologue this with sympathy for all rape victims. (I realize that "prologue" is not a verb. But if "preface" can be a verb, then goddamit, I think "prologue" should, too.) (JR)
October 31, 2003 at 10:24:54
Name: J.
E-mail: brennan@email.arizona.edu
Website: www.u.arizona.edu/~brennan
Subject: 123greetings.com crank e-mail
Jason,
I checked out 123greetings.com, and it seems they don't have your
website posted in any of their links. I thought it might be under the
teens, love, or religion categories, but it seems not. Neither is it under
the "special" category. Perhaps this website is so special it cannot
even be placed with the others.
Keep up the good work. I'm not taking my link to you down.
Editor's Note: Nope, even as recent as today, the link is still there. Check out the bottom of the page. I think my next goal will be to get someone to send me money after I insult them. BTW, I gotta respect your links page. Any doctoral student in philosophy that links to my site (without the words "that fucking cocksucker" anywhere in the proximity), deserves my respect - and thanks. (JR)
October 29, 2003 at 00:10:33
Name: Jonathan Powers
E-mail: jonathan@idealogiccorporation.com
Subject: Comment on question regarding the gay stereotype
Being a masculine gay man myself who has met thousands of the
effeminant ones over the years, it seems to me that it all comes down
to whether the guy is individualistic or collectivistic.
To the independent-minded guy, being gay simply means that you are
sexually attracted to men instead of women, and everything else in life is
determined by your own choices, values, etc.
The guys that buy into the stereotype seem to have a much stronger
desire to fit in with a group. To them, being gay isn't just a sexual
orientation. It also includes acting a certain way, talking a certain way,
enjoying dance clubs, liking the same pop divas, being a demoncrat,
looking out for the oppressed, supporting all the gay political and
charitable non-profits, and on and on.
But this is not only a gay phenominon. I've seen people change their
behaviour to better fit in with the "culture" of all kinds of groups:
urban black culture, country club culture, law firm culture, etc. And they
don't always keep the same bahaviour 24/7.
Anyone who looks to others for approval more than they look to
themselves will go to greater lengths to change themselves to match the
"others".
Editor's Note: Interesting. But I do still wonder why the flamboyant "culture" (or caricature) has developed. I think it has to do with the need to tell others that their own masculinity (real or perceived) has been rejected. I.e., "There's nothing to worry about here, ma'am. This dick is out of commission, and will no longer pose any threat to you. Feel free to move about the cabin." (JR)
October 28, 2003 at 12:01:03
Name: stephanie
E-mail: morningsunflower@excite.com
Subject: i disagree with roth
OK first off why do we argue about advertisement how
petty.Roth do you have a job, cuz to me it sounds like you just like to
bitch.Wawawawa theres a male ppalican holding a pickle and saying madam. There
are a lot of other problems in the world that are more seriouse than a
pickle advertisement. So Roth! Are you a madam?
Cuz it surly sounds like it.only a baby Girl would bitch about that. As
for the CEO Dont step down because of a freak like Roth he just needs
something to bitch about.I happen to never notice lil things like
that.Besides its the flavore that counts.
Editor's Note: With an e-mail address like "morningsunflower", you damn well better disagree with me. The funniest aspect of your post is that you chose to spend your time on a subject you deemed petty. There are a lot more "seriouse" problems in the world that you could have addressed. Like illiteracy. (JR)
October 24, 2003 at 21:41:31
Name: Jason
E-mail: jason@freestatecafe.org
Website: www.freestatecafe.org
Subject: People Whose Funerals Deserve Low Attendance
Re: "Men who hate small dogs. (Four words: Get a fucking penis!)"
I'm a man, and I hate small dogs. I'll give you a rational
explanation why too. I don't need a big dog because he makes me look big, and I
don't own a big truck either, I own a small toyota. Small dogs are
useless, usually yapping furr balls. All they do is provide affection
eat, drink, shit, and piss. I have two medium sized dog companions (50
pounds each). Not only do they provide companionship and affection, but
they're actually USEFULL. My dogs can be used for hunting, protection,
and to excersize with. Small dogs are useless because they are of no
real use when you factor in that my dogs are smarter and more
affectionate. Small dogs may be able to detect someone near your perimeter, but
for me personally, I get annoyed and feel an odd sense of self
encouragement for steping on a small thing threatening me with a bad attitude.
I say let's kill and stuff all the small dogs in the world and use them
for footballs. If you wish to defend what you've typed, or discuss
this further, I've posted a thread concerning your list and what I think
of your last pick at www.freestatecafe.org/forum.htm in the Common Room.
Sincerly,
Jason
Editor's Note: A pet isn't a pair of needle-nose pliers. It's great if your dog can fetch the Sunday New York Times (well, it would be if the New York Times was worth reading), but the main purpose of a pet to a non-blind individual is the aforementioned companionship and affection. I don't see a reason to hate a dog you can't take hunting. As far as "bad attitude" goes, I much prefer the thing with the bad attitude to be small rather than large. Regardless, I'm a cat person. (JR)
October 24, 2003 at 19:58:17
Name: Jenna
E-mail: stargrl33@yahoo.com
Subject: "real women have curves"
FINALLY, someone else thought the same thing I did upon
hearing the title of this movie. Everyone who I expressed my opinion to,
however, babbled about me being too narrow minded and not eating enough.
Editor's Note: And hey, if you're thin and you need more curves, just bend over. (JR)
October 23, 2003 at 21:44:27
Name: libertarian kat
E-mail: plath81@yahoo.com
Subject: movie warning
this sounds so general but i really love this site! i'm
currently at a totally "bleeding heart liberal arts" college and i'm always
the minority...those courses like quantum economics in sociology and
coping with whiteness were great, and actually almost realistic (well the
sociology one was right on but they never make us lick anyone's boots
- we don't have a coping with whiteness class though we should have a
whiteness class of some sort, and it should be called "Celebrating White
Culture" - they celebrate everything else, don't they?)
And I liked the Rush Limbaugh comment with the Yahoo NHL headline and
how no one cared when Yahoo (or other big media source) did the same
sort of thing. I've been hearing Rush since I was about 10 since my dad
always listened to him and tried to explain what he was saying too, so
I've always been on his side and I hate the non objective liberal
media!!!!
By the way, i wanted to warn everyone about the new movie out, "Runaway
Jury." It's based on a novel by John Grisham, but they changed the
book's subject from a lawsuit against a tobacco company to a suit against a
gun company in the film. The film was majorly calling the guns evil and
the antigun people obviously the good guys, the worst slanting of a
trial ever, too emotional. in the end the conclusion was supposed to be
that the gun company had tried to sway the jury (since they did), but it
was also obvious that the whole film was trying to sway the audience to
believe the antigun side. totally unfair. The whole movie was just
irritating and stereotypical, devoid of personal responsibility and
objectivity. maybe you should review it...i'm sure you could do a better job
than I.....
Editor's Note: It's interesting that they changed the target to a gun company. So now Hollywood has dealt with the big triumvirate of "social evils": gun control; tobacco (also in The Insider); and toxic waste dumping (Erin Brockovich and A Civil Action. The movie I'd like to see would be about some woman who sues "big breasts" (as opposed to "big tobacco") over her breast implants causing her colon cancer and the jury ruling that she and her lawyers were money-chasers who falsified the whole damn thing. (JR)
October 22, 2003 at 12:08:40
Name: Christina
E-mail: computergeneratedjesus@yahoo.com
Subject: what the hell are you talking about?
The movie "Real Women Have Curves" isn't about obesity, its
about a girl who grew up in a family of garment workers and wants to go
to college instead of being a garment worker. What the hell does that
have to do with obesity? Why would you waste precious words in a column
of social commentery to attack an adage? Oh please what are your
thoughts on "a penny saved a penny earned"? That whole thing made no sense.
Editor's Note: Obviously I should have made the additional complaint that the title isn't even relevant to the plot. (Unless, that is, the phrase is supposed to be synonymous with something that the girl hears from people trying to hold her back. If that's the case, I will gladly rescind my complaints against HBO.) My complaints against the meaning of the phrase itself stand. That kind of "let's justify our flaws by repeating canned mantras" bullshit is pretty damn annoying. (JR)
October 21, 2003 at 16:13:02
Name: Ian
E-mail: ihall@stetson.edu
Website: dreams.mindspillage.net
Subject: Begging the question!
"Begging the question" is a phrase commonly misused in the
mainstream media, and I was dismayed to see you make the same error. So,
in interest of giving you yet another avenue of superiority over the
mainstream media, here's a quick explanation. "Begging the question" is
a logical fallacy in which a proposition supporting the conclusion is
(usually covertly) slipped into the conclusion. The Bible is true
because it says that it is true and it cannot lie is an example of
begging the question: the first proposition is contained in the
conclusion. Unfortunately, somewhere along the line the media took "begging the
question" to be the same as "raising the question," and has subsequently
proliferated their error like an intellectual virus.
Editor's Note: That was sloppy of me to use a phrase not knowing its exact meaning. Thank you, I will make a note. (JR)
October 21, 2003 at 13:58:32
Name: Christina
E-mail: computergeneratedjesus@yahoo.com
Subject: Pill poppin Rush
I think you are flat ass wrong about Rush Limbaugh. His
comment was totally factually wrong, and it was stupid. It wasn't racist.
Racist would be "He's not a good quaterback because he's black and
everyone knows black people can't run something as complicated as the offense
of a football team." But thats really besides the point. Rush is just
pissed because since his heyday in the Clinton years he lost his moronic
audience to Hannity, Coulter, and everyother right wing piece of crap
on TV. His market share collapsed and since his base abandoned him, he
was scoping ways to make more $$ so he stirred up ESPN claiming football
was just a hobby for him and oddly defending himself with "I don't need
the money" on his website .Everyone is bitching about first amendment
rights to free speech, which is the dumbest thing I've ever heard. When
you're working for someone else you have no first amendment rights. And
if he hadn't have stepped down, ESPN would have fired him. Why blame
ESPN for not wanting bad press? At one point in the history of this
country you could probably say something like that on Sunday Night Football
and no one would have batted an eyelash. Kudos to ESPN for not wanting
to go back there. Maybe ESPN wouldn't have fired him if there were a
shred of empirical evidence, explanation or even common sense behind the
comments. If only we all had jobs where we could run around and say
stupid shit and not be held accountable. But we don't. I don't ever recall
hearing ESPN say we "hired" Rush specifically to "say stupid shit on
the air that would piss people off." Knowing what we know now about Rush,
they probably fired him because he came to work whacked out half the
time and this was the straw that broke the camels back so to speak.
Opiate junkies aren't exactly the most reliable employees usually. FOX news
makes their $$ from neocon ranting, maybe Limbaugh can apply there when
he gets out of rehab. ESPN makes their $$ from covering sports. Rush
just didn't work out through his probationary period. Sorry Rush.
Editor's Note: You're glad he's gone, I can see that. But if you really believed the problem was "running around and saying stupid shit and not being held accountable", then you would have recommended that one of those other on-air ESPN pussies had actually asked him to explain himself. A loss of a job (one which he probably would have lost anyway once the drug addiction story came out) is not commensurate with minor ambiguity in a few-minute commentary. BTW, the last time I checked, McNabb had the worst QB rating in the NFL. (JR)
October 20, 2003 at 16:01:33
Name: Roy
E-mail: sammy@muzzysattic.com
Subject: Every now and then I just can't believe the shallowness and stupidity of some people...
you are absolutely one of those people.
Simply because one enjoys a can of coke or two, doesn't mean that they
are not able to simultaneously offer some of what they have to the less
fortunate.
I am struggling with the effects of a difficult economy. I have
received kindness from others through their generosity - I am still able to
assist homeless and hungry or those less fortunate then myself. I can enjoy a
can of coke and also enjoy the feeling of offering a great deal on both the
spiritual/emotional and physical level, including sending money to Feed
the Children, cleaning homes for the elderly and offering a job to an
otherwise, unemployable homeless person, even though I don't need the help. One
cannot change the world by themselves but they can do something and something
is not nothing.
You are a cold and ignorant individual. I hope you know what its like
some day to be on the receiving end and come to understand that every little
bit of giving helps even if it isn't the ultimate giving up of everything
one has. You are a foolish person and I hope I never have the unfortunate
experience of knowing anyone like you.
Without Apology,
Marie
Editor's Note: Like a typical altruist, you've lied to yourself about the issues so you don't have to identify the principles. You know damn well I wasn't condemning "help". What I was condemning is that nothing in your philosophy tells you what, if anything, you can do for yourself. Actually, it tells you the opposite: that moral value is dependent solely on the values given away. (Note the circular definition.) All that a practicing altruist can do is to vaguely admit that a complete sacrifice is impossible without actually nailing yourself to a cross, so instead you allow yourself the inconsistencies. Altruism doesn't have a monopoly on "help". To me, though, help is the act of proliferating one's own values, sometimes in emergency conditions. To you, it's the act of doing anything for anybody else, so long at it's at your own expense. (JR)
October 20, 2003 12:48:25
Name: Jim
Subject: Google Links
Just tickled pink that the search for "smelly cheese orgy"
brought me to your site.
Editor's Note: But not until page four. (Long after the link to the Radiohead site comes up.) (JR)
October 17, 2003 at 18:24:44
Name: Atheist
Subject: 13 Ways to Make a Bible Useful
Really helpful article, now I finally know what to do with my
bible.
October 16, 2003 at 12:25:23
Name: Roy
E-mail: firehornet55@aol.com
Subject: rebuttle of Radio
If you had half of a heart for athletics you would understand
what it means it not be able to do what you always wanted to do. Im
willing to put money on youve never steped on an athletic feild on high
school or college. You would have no idea what it is like to have to
overcome such an obsticle. I do ive been an athelete my whole life. So
Hollywood may be trying to make an extra buck but at least its with a story
with a good message, Give people a chance. Not like another stupid
horror movie with the same thing. Who the hell are you to try to butch a
movie that has such a message. Screw you buddy!
Editor's Note: Clearly, you're a dumb jock who can emotionally identify with the mentally retarded. In addition, you're also illiterate and a lousy gambler. Given the available evidence, therefore, I'd say you were well within the scope of the target audience for this movie. (JR)
October 15, 2003 at 18:41:35
Name: Norb Bippus
Subject: quote
I found this in a fortune cookie and got a kick out of it, it
reminded me of your site: "life is a tragedy for those who feel and a
comedy for those who think"
Editor's Note: I won't go into detail about the philosophical errors of that fortune cookie writer. Instead, I'll just point out that I'm sick and tired of fortune cookies that give you observations instead of fortunes. That is not what I expect from a "fortune" cookie, god dammit. (JR)
October 14, 2003 at 17:22:57
Name: phoenix
E-mail: phoenix@alephnulldimension.net
Subject: progress!
...on how to stop violence starting by eliminating certain words.
research indicates that in 1983, parents said "fistfuck" approximately 13 times a week.
now, after your website, with the urge to remove the word "fistfuck" from the vocabulary we use with kids, "fistfuck" is used, on average, only 6 times per week. this dramatic, over 50% reduction owes its thanks to your hard work.
thank you for telling us not to say "fistfuck" in front of our children!
keep up the good work and maybe we can get it from 6 down to 5.
Editor's Note: Thank you. We at Save the Humans are proud at having been ahead of our time on the fistfuck issue. To take our society to the next step, of five or even four usages of the word per week, I recommend refraining from performing the fistfuck technique as punishment for children staying out past their curfew or refusing to eat their vegetables. This will only lead your child to ask you questions like, "Mommy, what are you doing?" cornering you into having to utter "fistfuck" that dreaded sixth time. (JR)
October 3, 2003 at 03:33:32
Name: Alex Burkhardt
Subject: good job.
How can I put this, your writing is beautiful, you are beautiful. You
have an interesting and personal style. I just wanted to know how old
you are and if you work or not. If you are anything less than a English
Professor at Harvard, I would be amazed.
Editor's Note: My writing is beautiful, I am beautiful? If that's the case, why would I work for Harvard? (JR)
October 11, 2003 at 12:18:44
Name: andrea
Subject: Awesome
i though that the list of punk covers were just awesome!
Editor's Note: Thanks. What do you think of Capitalism? (JR)
October 9, 2003 at 20:16:17
Name: Casey Spence
E-mail: seksi_boo2002@hotmail.com
Subject: Holocaust
why are you such a freak show about the Holocaust lock kids
in a cafeteria what to make them remember it? whats wrong with you i
came across this site while i'm working on an english project ahh why are
you so pshychotic about this?!? what is wrong with you seriously?
Editor's Note: Here's a tip: keep working on that English project. (JR)
October 9, 2003 at 12:53:32
Name: Anthropologist
Subject: Your Gay Pride rant
Pride comes from individual achievement-- and being able to
accept, understand, and celebrate one's self in spite of a culture of
discrimination and homophobia is an individual achievement of most
participants of a gay pride parade, who celebrate it together, publicly. I
find your philosophy (objectivism) silly and immature, with a majority of
its followers fairly intelligent, young, white males from middle-class
to affluent backgrounds. It is a philosophy that justifies their class
status and any selfish (anti-collectivist) feelings they may have. Are
you *proud* of that? I find it a curious, self-serving coincidence.
I did love the 41 things not to do in a men's bathroom list, though--
it had me in tears-kudos!
Editor's Note: Nice try. Your statement "pride comes from individual achievement" is correct. However, someone's need to rub it in my face is not a sign of pride. (And therefore whatever it is they're rubbing, it ain't pride.) I find it interesting that you prefer 41 Stupid Things to Do in a Men's Public Restroom over the only rational philosophy ever created. Even my mind isn't that much in the toilet. (JR)
October 8, 2003 at 13:16:11
Name: Jim
E-mail: j_wendelken@yahoo.com
Subject: none
adamant defenses of psychosis over rationality as Woman Under
the Influence.
Wrong.
Editor's Note: Compare the Gena Rowlands character to the "rational" Peter Falk character. If you don't think she was depicted positively, you're a fucking moron. Even someone who likes the movie should admit that. Just for the hell of it, I checked the IMDB, and here's how their plot outline begins, "Mabel, a wife and mother, is loved by her husband Nick but her madness proves to be a problem in the marriage. The film transpires to a positive role of madness in the family, challenging conventional representations of madness in cinema." A pretentious way of saying exactly what I said. (JR)
October 7, 2003 at 18:21:11
Name: David Buchner
E-mail: buchner@wcta.net
Website: customer.wcta.net/buchner
Subject: Mammaries
Jason, your mother ought to smack you.
Editor's Note: That's ok, she'll never read that. She tried visiting this site once but told me she "didn't get it". (JR)
October 3, 2003 at 23:09:42
Name: David Buchner
E-mail: buchner@wcta.net
Website: customer.wcta.net/buchner
Subject: Stupid Pop Song Lyrics
"...a message to the Counting Crows and Joni Mitchell: You
don't "put up" a parking lot. If anything, you put it down..."
While I was working in the same store for three years, I heard a lot of
crappy songs, over and over and over again. I took notes about some of
the more illogical lines, and someday I'll find them all and compile
them.
Your example reminds me of is "it's time to pull this ship into shore
and throw away the oars forever." Ships don't have oars. They don't come
into shore, either. What he means is a BOAT. That one's actually a
really old song, and I've had this annoying mental image haunting me, of a
big luxury liner being paddled up onto a sandy beach.
Your eyes have a mist from the smoke of a distant fire. Huh?
My love is stronger than the universe. Is "strength" the quality that
comes to mind when you contemplate the universe? Nice, big, strong
universe.
There was the epistemological one; something like "I didn't see it, I
can't believe it, oooo but I feel it."
Editor's Note: And you should make a separate list of the cliches. "Catch me when I'm falling" is one that drives me up the fucking wall. Catch your own damn self. Or better yet, don't fucking fall! What am I, you're personal lifeguard? (JR)
October 3, 2003 at 23:07:52
Name: Bob
Subject: The Vlasic STORK
What the hell? Who the hell are you calling 'Pelican'? Do I
look like a pelican to you? As any swaddled babe could attest, I am 100%
Stork, and I'm 100% pissed. I'll have you know that I'm considering a
lawsuit against you, on charges of birdism. You people think we're all
the same!
Editor's Note: Shit, it's embarrassing that I don't know the difference between storks and pelicans. However, there was a stripper on the Howard Stern show one morning who didn't know that pickles were made out of cucumbers. If I had to pick a category of knowledge to specialize in, I'd much rather take pickled vegetables over long-beaked birds. (JR)
October 3, 2003 at 05:00:03
Name: Bob
E-mail: danabob1945
Subject: top ten city slogans
Are these supppose to be funny?? You do a top ten list with
#10 being the first one. Duh!
Editor's Note: I guess you never watched David Letterman. You should check it out sometime. You'd be great in his "stupid pet tricks" bit. Oh, and by the way: in case you've noticed that you're not receiving any e-mail, it might be because you're a fucking moron. (JR)
September 30, 2003 at 13:25:29
Name: Jason
E-mail: Jasonbrad@comcast.net
Subject: greatest website ever
Great website ever man. I never thought I would find a
website that promotes the destruction of Muslims, appreciates Capitalism,
hates hippies and loves punk rock (MXPX). you rock, get back to me.
Editor's Note: Thanks. Being a punk fan and a Capitalist don't always mix. Sometimes, all it means is that a bunch of tattooed anti-Capitalists with their balls pierced get my money. (And just to be clear, I only want destroy the Muslims who want to kill us.) (JR)
September 26, 2003 at 19:20:54
Name: Judd Dulick
E-mail: juddandcathy@earthlink.net
Subject: waiters
You'll roast in hell for your postings on fucking with waiters. Alternately, you'll get E.Coli from the fecal matter placed in your food. Enjoy.
Editor's Note: I should have added a disclaimer: fucking with waiters should be done for amusement purposes only. (JR)
September 22, 2003 00:40:42
Name: Curl
Subject: Whoa
Hey, it's a tough world for most of us, but some have the
luxury time to spew this kind of masturbatory bullshit. Worse, there are
actually people who read it and give it more than a moments thought?
Whoa... what a waste of a website.
Editor's Note: I take some offense to your comment about my "luxury time". However, since you offered the "masturbatory bullshit" compliment, let's just call it even. (JR)
September 26, 2003 at 13:28:49
Name: Jenny White
E-mail: jenny_white@charter.net
Subject: Radio
I went to high school with Radio at T.L. Hanna in Anderson,
SC. I haven't seen the film, so I can't comment on the accuracy or
inaccuracy of it. I will, however, comment on the story itself. It really
is this sappy and inspiring, and I am not one to go for much of this
type of thing. Radio was always treated with respect when I was in
school with him which was 1999, not 1967. If you have any doubts, you're
welcome to come to a football game on Friday nights and meet him
yourself.
Editor's Note: Ok, so you're not commenting on the film. I was. And since neither of us actually saw it, we have that much in common. But here's where we disagree: I don't think "sappy" is ever inspiring. (JR)
September 25, 2003 at 22:42:45
Name: Alaina
E-mail: alaina_great_time@hotmail.com
Subject: Hilarious!
When a friend of mine sent me this address (originally just
the part about the wedding vows) I didn't know what to expect, and what
I did find had me almost splitting my sides with laughter, especially
the classifieds - I know a few people that would be idiotic enough to
genuinely respond to some of them!
The address has now been copied into my "favourites" so I can see any
new comments and send a few sites to my mates!
Thank You!
Alaina
~X~
Editor's Note: Thanks, and sorry it took so long for me to post your comments. I vow (yet again) to update this site regularly. And re. those classifieds: I like 'em too. Aaron did a nice job on those. (JR)
September 25, 2003 at 13:49:31
Name: Gilbert R.
E-mail: gilbert1999@hotmail.com
Subject: You guys are freakin funny
I was surfing the net trying to find out who was the founder
for Purdue Chicken(ya know, the old dude who was always doing
commercials before his "son" took over them)and I somehow stumbled onto this
page. And let me tell you; it's the funniest fucking thing I've found
online in a long time. How'd you guys start this? Do you get paid? And,
can I join the team?? I can be funny....or made fun of; it's all good
to me.
Editor's Note: I get paid, but that has nothing to do with this site. At least, for the time being. You can submit something if you want, but I don't recommend it. I've been terrible about reading submissions and actually getting back to people. After most of the submissions I have seen, there's not a lot to motivate me to read them anymore. If that sounds arrogant, then it sounds the way it's supposed to. (JR)
September 21, 2003 at 09:14:00
Name: Mike S.
Subject: September 11th
Could not agree more with what you said.
For that reason, I am greatly disheartened with this war in Iraq. We
are wasting time, lives, energy and resources fighting a perceived enemy
which posed no threat to us at all.
We should focus our efforts on Syria, Yemen, Saudi Arabia and North
Korea. Each of these pose an actual or credible potential threat. Saddam
was a neutered mutt, unable to even harm his neighbors, let alone the
US.
Editor's Note: I disagree with you that Iraq was not a threat. Not as great a threat as some of the other countries you mentioned, however. (JR)
September 15, 2003 at 15:08:03
Name: Leslie Connell
E-mail: ocaptainmycaptain@yahoo.com
Subject: Rape and Responsibility
You seem to be suggesting that in some cases victims are
responsible for being raped. Where is the logical place that the line
would be drawn? Forgive me if it doesn't seem intuitive. If one believes
that a woman is never responsible for "rape" (as it is defined by the
law), a line isn't needed. In the case of your philosophy, we need to
know where the line is drawn. You seem to be suggesting that if I woman
tempts a man somehow, the rape is partially her fault. Okay, if we are
to accept this way of thinking, a woman would be responsible for what
happened to her if she were attacked while walking down the street
naked. So we can assume that when a man sees a woman naked, she is
partially to blame if she is raped. Okay. So if a woman is walking around in
her house naked and a man is peeping through the blinds, is she
responsible if he breaks in and rapes her? You also mentioned risque
clothing. If a woman is swimming at a public pool in a bathing suit, is she
responsible if she is raped? What if she is swimming and flirting with a
man? That must be complete consent. It gets very hairy if you take
all the actresses who have had nude scenes in movies. Is Julia Roberts
responsible if she is raped by one of the many men who have seen her in
movies where she is nude or in risque clothing and acting seductive? I
see you are fond of labeling people, so I don't doubt that you will
label me, if you even post this. Your philosphies would make western
society into a place where women are covered in floor length veils. Any
women who thought that there might be a chance that a man would see the
outline of her female shape and take it as an invitation would wear the
veil to avoid being responsible for a nightmarish act that could
happen~that she would be blamed for. Perhaps we should punish rape victims
like they do certain countries. After all, many of them were out
walking on the street with their arms and legs and faces (oh no!) for the
world to see.
Editor's Note: You need to differentiate between moral responsibility and legal responsibility. A careless woman who gets raped obviously doesn't deserve punishment; the guy violated her rights, not vice versa. However, every woman is morally responsible for taking care of herself. She violates this responsibility to herself when she puts herself in a dangerous position. Your attempt to identify blurry, "grey" situations doesn't deny the fact that carelessly dangerous positions do exist. (JR)
September 10, 2003 at 06:16:42
Name: Steve
Subject: Asses
Hey Jason, your theory about anal sex being a step away from
gaydom brings up a question. Are you a latent homosexual if you like
blowjobs?
Editor's Note: Shit. You've fucked with my whole theory. On second thought, I think the theory holds. An ass is really only one of two things. It's a way to get rid of lunch, or it's a vagina substitute. I think I agree with Morton Downey, Jr. on this point: "The anus is an exit, not an entrance." (JR)
September 8, 2003 at 15:36:36
Name: Eric
Subject: Prize
When you talk about the "mystery prize guaranteed to be
valued at nothing" are you referring to a copy of a Michael Moore
documentary or a Noam Chomsky book?
Editor's Note: If I ever gave someone either of those things, I would be one hell of a generous asshole. (JR)
September 5, 2003 at 17:02:14
Name: Christina
E-mail: computergeneratedjesus@yahoo.com
Subject: Ann Coulter
As you may know, I'm a life long dedicated fiscal and social
liberal and die hard trade unionist. Anyway...I was watching CSPAN the
other day. Sometimes, CSPAN in all its objectivity covers some really
shitty stuff and this day was no exception. They were on some College
Republican Woman's Conference. Besides looking more like a repressed
carpet munching orgy searching desperately for a closet big enough, Ann
Coulter was the keynote speaker. Through the historically asinine defenses
of Joe McCarthy and the psychopathic attacks on Bill Clinton and his
wife (my senator)and her fantasies of locking up and deporting everyone
like me that resides in America...I couldn't help a dirty dirty thought
from charging through my brain.
I WISH I WERE A MAN. If I were a man, I think I would make it my life's
goal to choke Ann Coulter to death with my cock.
Until then, I am going to continue to pray (euphamism in the athiest
sense) that Ann Coulter crashes, burns and ends up working at the
Popeye's chicken down the block from me. Pray with me Jason, Pray with me.
Editor's Note: Since we're both atheists, it won't bother you that I won't be praying, and it doesn't bother me that you will be. As for Coulter, I like that chick, and am proud to say that I've seen her debate in person and met her afterwards. My question is: if the event reminded you of a "repressed carpet munching orgy", why you think that Coulter would have any interest in your cock? (JR)
September 4, 2003 at 15:34:16
Name: Doug
E-mail: dhaze048@uottawa.ca
Subject: Latest Outburst
Excellent outburst. But there's one thing that didn't seem
right. Something that implied otherwise about said "heterosexuality":
"Fundamentally, there is no difference between a men's locker room and
the ten-minute period of time before the start of a gay orgy."
Is the pre-orgy statement also derived from empirical evidence?
Editor's Note: Actually, that conclusion was formed deductively, not inductively. My empirical evidence consists of: (1) I've seen people get naked to have sex, (2) porn has taught me that orgies exist, and (3) in my experience, you need a woman around to have heterosexual sex. Therefore, when a bunch of guys start getting undressed, I head outside to the goddamn weight room. (JR)
August 31, 2003 at 22:01:18
Name: Rory
E-mail: Rory@myway.com
Subject: Your website.
Dude,
Your website is hella-funny. I knew this kind of feedback would
probably piss you off since it's the 'generic feedback'. DUDE YOU ROCK.
Not really,
Rory
Editor's Note: Generic feedback that praises me is always allowed. (JR)
August 31, 2003 at 06:16:17
Name: Chris
Subject: Insane, Crazy Women
Yeah, they all are. I am the only man in an office of women.
While this may sound like a great idea for a porno, it sucks if you
have to do it for a living. It's about 50/50 young cute stuff/old
biddies, and 100% crazy. They have absolutely nothing going on so they make
other people's lives and business their own, and do nothing but talk
about you and everything about you. It's extremely, unbelievably
insulting, but with our '21st Century post-modern woman', men now have to deal
with women not only at home and on the street, but at work as well.
Most women are not only jealous of, and hate each other, but you as well.
As an example, my boss: Let's just say the airport has less baggage
than this chick. Don't tell her anything you don't want told to everyone
else in the office (eventually) because this girl couldn't mind her own
business to save her life. "But if it sucks, why work there?"
Neccessity aside, I'm there for the long haul, after I graduate and can move
to another department (IT). But, until then, I'll just keep my head
down, and my mouth shut.
Editor's Note: Head down and mouth shut? I'd hate to see you encounter a goddamn dragon or something, I think you'd piss in your pants. (JR)
August 30, 2003 at 23:01:04
Name: Brian H
E-mail: lilbri3323@cs.com
Subject: i want my girl,megan, back...BAD
I lost a girl(Megan) i really liked and cared for on aug. 27
we were goin out havin fun and everything seem good untill she told me
she was tinkin and she tought that personaly she thinks we should just
be FRIENDS GOD i hate that word but she still wants to talk to me on
the phone and stuff she just likes it better when were were friends and
the worst part is she dont have a reason why she wanted to break up w/me
i asked her what i did wrong and she said nuthin so i asked did u find
another guy and she said no so i guess we broke up for no reason and
its only been a couple of days but it seems like its been forever i just
miss her so much and i want her back really bad but i dont know what to
do im loosin sleep and im not doing so great in sports and school b/c
of this i just cant concentrate and i cant stop thinking bout her i
still love and have feelings for her and its drivin me crazy i dont know
what to do but i got to do somethin to get her back so PLEASE help me ive
never felt this way for another girl ever. If ur reading this megan now
u know how i feel bout u so please tell me what i got to do to get u
back cauz baby anything u say ill do....I LOVE YOU
PLEASE HELP ME!
Editor's Note: Since I include the referring URL with every post that's made to this site, I was able to see that you came from Google, and had searched for "post love comments". Out of the 54,200,000 pages on the entire Web with these words, it's interesting this page comes up third. But considering that this page has nothing to do with ex-girlfriends wishing to reunite with their boyfriends, it's curious that you post a message like this. I guess this is the Internet version of the message in a bottle... (JR)
August 28, 2003 at 11:57:14
Name: Carlos Iriondo
E-mail: carlos@mmilligan.com
Subject: Right
You're damn right on this one
August 28, 2003 at 11:36:44
Name: John
E-mail: ven1111@yahoo.com
Subject: Alcohol Article
Very enlightening :)
I came accross this article while trudging through the net for an
alcohol assignment.
It was very uplifting article that I'm sure my friends will also enjoy!
Editor's Note: It wasn't exactly supposed to be uplifting, but whatever floats your goat. (JR)
August 23, 2003 at 01:24:49
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
|
|
