|
Comments, Love Letters, and Death Threats
This section of the website is no longer being updated. Visit the new website.
Comments:
Name: Jeanine
Subject: about time
i can't think of anything better to say than this: i could
not agree more with what you wrote here - well said. extremely well said.
Editor's Note: You could write "enclosed is one naked photo of myself". Why do rock stars get all the fun? This has only happened to me once. (JR)
November 6, 2006 at 22:15:27
Name: William Hall
Subject: A woman's body
I loved the article on "ass". I just had a hot conversation
on a similar subject with a group of women and was criticized for
commenting on a woman's body. As if each and every comment said by a man
touches upon just a sexual innuendo. All I said, "She has a perfect
body", out loud. Meaning height, weight, and stop nothing else. No, I
couldn't just mean that. Well, the squawking started from there.
Enjoy men of today and speak freely because tomorrow's future is
turning into a politically correct, sexual bars day.
Editor's Note: You want us to believe that your criteria for a perfect body are ideal height and weight only? Those chicks were on to you. Their bodies may have been horrible, but they knew you were full of shit. (JR)
November 5, 2006 at 10:01:25
Name: Nate
Subject: Nate
Wow Dude,
Alright here's the deal. I really don't know what's more pathetic, the
whole article or the fact that you even wrote it. It's sorry fucks
like you that make all the good things in life shitty. I bet your only
true beef with Budweiser is that it didn't get your freshman year prom
date drunk enough to go down on you. As far as taste goes, I happen to
think that Budweiser has a fairly acceptable taste. But then again how
would i know? I'm just a broke ass college kid. I would like to say
that someday maybe I'll achieve the expert tasting ability you have
created for yourself, but then then i would have to transform into a
lifeless hack like you. Hope all of your days can be as optimistic and
exciting as the article. Later, Fagget
Editor's Note: Don't accuse me of being such a loser that I couldn't get my prom date to go down on me. First of all, in my experience, "to go down on" is properly used in reference to what one does to a woman, not vice versa. Second, I didn't have a prom date. I spent my prom night with two male friends at a comedy club. Now, if you'd like to reword your accusation using more accurate evidence, please do. (JR)
November 3, 2006 at 15:34:50
Name: losers
Subject: hahaha
you guys are queers.
except for number 18, i like it.
Editor's Note: Of all things not to be queer, you pick a puppet show in a bathroom? (JR)
October 27, 2006 at 12:15:38
Name: julio
Subject: 44 grocery things
this was so hilarious! i was cracking up the whole time, and
the lady in the library kept giving me dirty looks.
Editor's Note: She was just annoyed that you weren't harnessing the library to its full boredom-inducing potential. (JR)
October 21, 2006 at 15:14:39
Name: Doug
Subject: Hijacker
Another use for Western moral bankruptcy. Even the
faith-confused terrorists know who will let them get away with what.
Editor's Note: Us Westerners are so tough to beat, we need to make it easy for them. (JR)
October 17, 2006 at 14:18:04
Name: Erick Martinez
Subject: Inside Job
Ok, 9/11 was an inside job by the U.S government, executed by
the Bush administration. Why can't the truth be said? Just end all of
this bs and just come out and say why this was done. The conscious
american people need questions answered and it is time. I do agree George
Orwell was an optimist. It's exactly whats happening, once I saw an
interview with a man and they asked him about the patriot act and what his
thoughts were, he said, "I would give up my freedom for my liberty."
Doublespeak, perfect example. The NWO or New World Order is taking over
and America is just one of many countries that are trying to be
controlled. The american people need to stand up(in arms if necessary) and say
no, I will not give up my rights for your regime. These people are
tyrants who want to control our country. And we call ourselves a democracy?
Editor's Note: Hee, haw! A real, live conspiracist wacko. (JR)
September 26, 2006 at 16:46:31
Name: gerlie
Subject: English teacher
Thaks a lot. I'm working here in China but i didnt know that
until i read this. Now i have come to understand things. I agree with
you. May God find ways to make their hearts human enough.
Editor's Note: For the sake of your students, I hope your class assignments don't include Swift's A Modest Proposal. Literary satire isn't your specialty. Then again, neither is English. (JR)
October 3, 2006 at 22:08:07
Name: Lex
E-mail: aiylithe@yahoo.com
Subject: Norwegian Cruise Ship
"traces of radiation remain, though residents of the area
have grown accustomed to occasional radiation poisoning, in addition to
the loss of homes and limbs."
Silly cockroaches.
I'm sure there are a few nice Muslims over in the middle east, and I'm
also sure that I wouldn't really care that much if they died along with
the damn radicals when the president eventually wizens up and wipes
them out. Religion is the only thing irrational enough to create
prejudice, and here's the president trying to support religion, the enemy's
religion, in the middle of a war. A *blatant* case of the sanction of the
victim. The president just lets them walk all over us, because political
correctness demands that he not address the real issue if it would put
the issue's object in a bad light (or in any light at all, for that
matter. If it's not named it's not real, right?). The object, in this
case, being the radical islamic terrorists who are trying to kill us. Is
that so hard for him to admit?
I hope the cruise line doesn't take any undeserved fallout for this.
-Lex
Editor's Note: I don't think the president's support for religion as such is an instance of sanction of the victim. Sanction of the victim (a term coined by Ayn Rand) is when a victim accepts the moral right of an aggressor to victimize him. I.e., the victim believes he deserves to be victimized. In the example you mention, the president is withholding justice partly for the purpose of protecting his own irrational beliefs. It's not that he believes he deserves to be victimized, but that that religion as such deserves to be protected. It's like refusing to kill a female terrorist because she's a woman. (JR)
September 26, 2006 at 16:46:31
Name: Steve
Subject: opinion piece
Bacteria between your teeth cause gum disease and Listerine
kills the bacteria. Contrary to what you believe, flossing is not done
to remove dinner from between your teeth. It's done to kill bacteria
which it does by simply disturbing the bactria as you run the floss
through. Listerine claims to be effective as flossing "in reducing gum
disease."
Editor's Note: I'm impressed, I induced an actual response from a spokestool for the Pfizer corporation. As shown in the screenshot I linked to, they say Listerine is "actually as effective as floss" and "not a replacement for floss" on the same page. This is blatant horseshit. Coating a layer of food particles with Listerine, regardless of how much bacteria it kills, can't possibly kill future bacteria resulting from keeping gradually eroding and decomposing food particles between your teeth. Even though I've been championing Judge Milian lately, I need to quote Judge Judy: "Don't pee on my leg and tell me it's raining." (JR)
September 26, 2006 at 10:58:20
Name: Me2
Subject: opinion piece
Actually, I had an opinion, but I now feel I have strong
philosophical grounds to refute the objective existence of opinions.
Editor's Note: I'm not sure I can trust you. People who refute opinions usually aren't crazy about objective existence. (JR)
September 26, 2006 at 07:24:33
Name: Matt Cook
Subject: Answers?
You have a lot to say about Islamic Fundamentalism, how
dangerous it is, and you obviously don't agree with how it's being handled.
Furthermore, you seem to be a large advocate of not following the
masses or "stirring the masses pot" as you said in "Judge Not, Yet." This
having been said, what do you suggest we do with Islamic Fundamentalists?
How you suggest we handle the terrorism?
You're not exactly stirring the pot by disagreeing with the Bush
Administration's handling of the situation as you're in agreement with about
80% of the country. So, basically, I'd like you to stir the pot for us.
Blow us away with your progressive, world-changing thinking. Provide us
with the mind-set all of us need to help turn this tough time in
history on its heels.
Editor's Note: 1. Declare war on Iran and destroy its government and military infrastructure. 2. Announce to the world that other nations which harbor and support terrorists hostile to the United States, especially of the Islamist variety, will be treated similarly, calling out Saudi Arabia and Syria in particular. 3. Communicate to all peaceful nations that the United States has the right to defend itself and to remove threats before suffering further attacks on our own soil. Emphasize that while we hope and welcome the partnership and cooperation of free nations, their acceptance of and agreement with our actions is not necessary. (JR)
September 25, 2006 at 15:49:24
Name: Matthew Brown
E-mail: jeffgordoneatsdick@yahoo.com
Website: www.mindifidoj.com
Subject: just letting you know
I've been reading your site for over a year, just wanted to
let you know I enjoy your editorials. The serious ones are poignant and
the satirical ones are funny as hell. Keep up the good work.
Editor's Note: Thank you. I never know what to say when someone doesn't call me a fucking idiot. (JR)
September 23, 2006 at 13:20:20
Name: Weeble the Duck in a Plankton Suit
Subject: Funerals with low attendance
The only people who deserve low attendance are thew people
who made up that list and get murdered by all the people offended in it.
But the rest of the top # lists are darn funny.
Editor's Note: If all of us who made up that list get murdered, I'll be sure to contact you from the dead and tell you if the virgins were worth it. (JR)
September 22, 2006 at 05:29:00
Name: Casey
Subject: I heat messed up people
Thank you!! It is about time someone blew the whole cliche
Halloween costumes out of the water! This is your sign \M/ Rock on
savethehumans!!
Editor's Note: I heat 'em, too. Fuck those fuckin' Halloween costumes. (JR)
September 21, 2006 at 00:13:50
Name: John Shuey
E-mail: jshuey@shueyfamily.org
Website: 360.yahoo.com/jshuey44
Subject: 8/11/06 Comments
First of all, I'll fan and admit I'm a fan of much you
write.
I must, however, take issue with your rant against those who are
concerned about government's using the "War on Terror" to stomp all over the
Bill of Rights.
It seems to me that you've set up a false dichotomy, .i.e. we can't be
safe unless we surrender basic rights. You are, to a large degree I
assume, referring to the guarantees of the Fourth Amendment. I do not
believe your conclusions to be true.
Certainly the Founders didn't differentiate between Life and
Liberty...they gave them equal billing.
Further, what if it was the First or Second Amendment that the
government was saying needed to be "relaxed"? What if the President decided
that Articles I and III were too much of a bother?
The folks on Flt. 93, much as the men and women of the Armed Forces who
have made the ultimate sacrifice, did so every bit as much for the
Constitution, liberty, and the rule of law as they did in order to preserve
our lives.
We could suck air equally as well in North Korea as in New York. Are
you saying that there is no real difference just so long as we can suck
air?
Editor's Note: In war, a soldier doesn't consult a judge for a warrant before blowing his head off. Our current war is taking place on, among other places, our own soil. We need to win this war by all available means, for the sake of protecting our lives and liberty. My presumption, however, is that: a war should be declared; an enemy named; the goal of war defined (i.e., when is the war over?); and the war should be fought 100% without the current bullshit moral cowardice with which we are now fighting it. If your concern is that nothing currently delimits what can be done within the nation's borders and to whom it can be done, I sympathize and agree. I am arguing against the idea that an enemy within our borders should be treated like an American citizen with all accompanying rights. (JR)
September 20, 2006 at 09:48:27
Name: Jessilin
E-mail: lalinchris@yahoo.com
Subject: "Real" Women DO have Curves
Just wanted to let that girl who posted the comment on the
true meaning behind the title of the movie that she is SUCH A DUMB
BITCH!!!!
Editor's Note: Thanks for putting this on the record. Not sure which "dumb bitch" you're referring to, though, since there have been a dozen or more such bitches. (JR)
September 18, 2006 at 14:48:05
Name: gabi
Subject: bad taste
i think that 'ways to amuse yourself with a homeless person'
was in very bad taste. It exploits the homeless and makes light of
their plight. I was not impressed by the stupidity of the piece.
Editor's Note: It's also in bad taste to piss in your pants on a crowded subway, but that doesn't stop the homeless. They exploit my plight of having to ride the subway with them to get to work in the morning. (JR)
September 17, 2006 at 20:57:44
Name: me
Subject: Top Ten Peace-loving Koran Quotes
Too bad no one had the foresight to edit the Koran like they
did the Bible. Even so, Deuteronomy 13:13-16:
"Some worthless men have gone out from among you and have seduced the
inhabitants of their city, saying, 'Let us go and serve other gods'
(whom you have not known)... If it is true and the matter established that
this abomination has been done among you, you shall surely strike the
inhabitants of that city with the edge of the sword, utterly destroying
it and all that is in it and its cattle with the edge of the sword.
Then you shall gather all its booty into the middle of its open square and
burn the city and all its booty with fire as a whole burnt offering to
the LORD your God; and it shall be a ruin forever. It shall never be
rebuilt. "
Sounds loving to me- all that for not believing in God.
Editor's Note: Actually, passages of the Bible right before the part you quoted are even more violent: "If your brother, your mother's son, or your son or daughter, or the wife you cherish, or your friend who is as your own soul, entice you secretly, saying, Let us go and serve other gods'... you shall not yield to him or listen to him; and your eye shall not pity him, nor shall you spare or conceal him. But you shall surely kill him; your hand shall be first against him to put him to death, and afterwards the hand of all the people. "So you shall stone him to death because he has sought to seduce you from the LORD your God who brought you out from the land of Egypt..." If you want to be an irrational asshole, there's sure as hell no shortage of material for you to accept mindlessly as truth. (JR)
September 17, 2006 at 00:38:58
Browse previous posts in our reader comment archive.
Complete reader comment archives:
26 | 25 |24 |23 | 22 | 21 | 20 | 19 | 18 | 17 | 16 | 15 | 14 | 13 | 12 | 11 | 10 | 9 | 8 | 7 | 6 | 5 | 4 | 3 | 2 | 1
|
Back to: home  10,000 frenchmen
|
|
