As an aside to how screwed up DC is, I made a comment last year that even though Kerry was vanquished, it was a great year because the Sox triumphed. After I suggested that I would have willingly accepted such a tradeoff if offered it in August 2004, I was met with looks of horror by many at the dinner party.
What’s the matter with these people? Do they not realize it’s a game?*
I find the indictment that Bush the Elder didn’t know how a supermarket scanner worked quite amusing. In all honesty, how many people here actually know how one works without having to look it up? By that, I don’t mean “you scan the barcode and it identifies the item and price”, but the actual mechanism of how it’s scanned, how the barcode carries information that the scanner can pick up, etc. There are a few people here I’d bet on knowing (and I happen to know myself), but I’m betting that it’s only a small percentage of us who truly know this information. I would tend to believe that the American public at large would be even less likely to know, given that blog readers in general are more tech-savvy than the populace as a whole–so how is it that not knowing how a supermarket barcode scanner works is an indicator that a politician is out of touch with the public?
Neither. It’s mere curiosity. I have no problem lambasting the stupidity of either side of the political aisle, but I prefer such attacks to be reasonable. Laughing at Bush the Younger for his inability to speak properly is fine with me, as is laughing at Howard Dean for his impressive ability to jam his foot down his throat. But laughing at a politican for not knowing how a barcode scanner works seems rather far-fetched to me, as I don’t think most people really do know. Now if he were an electrical engineer who didn’t know how one worked, that would be another matter entirely…
Coach, it’s obvious that it’s not a serious piece. It’s clearly a humor piece, as no one in their right mind would actually see a causal relationship between the existence of Karl Rove and the fate of ND football. But part of what makes satire amusing is the ability to play close enough to reality that it strikes a chord. In 1992, Bush the Elder really did say that he was amazed by the existence of supermarket scanners, and this was widely taken as a sign of his complete lack of touch with normal life, rather than the more reasonable notion that he was amazed by the technology being developed. And it’s this criticism which I was pointing out as being inherently amusing.
As an analogy, has anyone else seen the movie Series 7: THe Contenders? I caught it in the theaters about 3 years ago or so. It’s a satire on reality television shows; in this one, contestants are forced to compete, and the goal is to be the last one left alive. Make it through 3 rounds, and you get to stop competing. Part of what made it so funny were the extreme stereotypes of the various competitors: the 18-year-old girl with the ultimate soccer parents; the shell-shocked war vet; the nurse with very strong views about the need for euthanasia, the formerly-gay painter/cancer survivor, the lower-middle-class slob with a wife and kids, and the (returning champion) 8-month pregnant single woman who’s her family’s black sheep. The humor wouldn’t have been anywhere near as strong had the characters not obviously been charicatures of easily-identified stereotypes.
Basically, just because something’s humor doesn’t mean that there aren’t other points to be made with it. And if you’re going to try labelling me as a knee-jerk Republican, Swarthington, you’re going to provide a lot of amuement value yourself.
My role here is not to judge you or anyone else. My role here is to circle around the perimeter of the herd seeking out the weak & the sickly. When I spot an individual perhaps a little slower than the rest, perhaps with a gimpy leg, I pounce, attempting to demean and belittle him or her.
What I do is perfectly natural and contributes to the health and viability of the herd in the long run. If I have not done my job well, then for that I am sorry and vow to do better next time.
Swarthy, if you honestly think that Mike, of all people, is “perhaps a little slower than the rest,” then no, you have not done your job well, not at all.
As for patting myself on the back: interesting. There are certain matter about which I happen to know a lot. Science is the predominant one–shocking, given that I’m a scientist. There are other matters in which I’m ignorant compared to the average amn on the street: sports statistics is a pretty obvious one (see the standings of Brendan’s football prediction contest for clear evidence of that). Neither of those make me inherently better or worse than anyone else, other than in that particular arena (ie, I’m a better scientist than most people, but I’m a worse football fan). But the main reason I even mentioned that I do know how a barcode scanner works is that I think it makes the fact that I don’t think it’s reasonable to criticize someone whose professional field is so far away from it stronger than it would be otherwise; if someone who does have this knowledge doesn’t think it’s terribly important for the average person to have, doesn’t that mean more than someone who doesn’t know it saying that it’s unimportant? If I said that I didn’t think a particular book was worth reading, wouldn’t the weight you put to my opinion be influenced by whether or not I had read the book myself? Was I also patting myself on the back earlier this week when I explained the reality of radiometric dating techniques, and why certain criticisms of them weren’t as strong as they might initially appear, as that’s another example of me displaying more knowledge about a particular subject than the average person would?
Myabe we just have different interpretations of the phrase, but to me, patting yourself on the back carries a connotation of praising yourself for something. I don’t really think that knowing or not knowing the details of how a supermarket scanner is cause for either praise or belittlement (unless it really does relate to your job), so that phrase just doesn’t seem to fit. At least in my view of the matter.
That guy on Jeopardy was a humorless prick. Same for the dude that won Millionaire. Brilliant cats, but they wouldn’t know a joke if it smacked them upside the head with one of Ally’s night props.
Just because we don’t find you or swarth funny doesn’t mean we are lacking in an understanding of wit. Sounds like you two are the ones too busy patting yourselves on the back for your cleverness (or lack there of).
I know that basic reading is a challenge for you, and that you soiled yourself in the corner in elementary school when the SRA books came out, but this latest offering is mind numbing even for you.
Neither I nor Swarthy wrote the joke in question, which, of course, is the matter at hand.
But feel free to lob another non sequitur our way, if you wish. You think they are hand grenades, but you always forget to pull the pin…
Alas, you two have none of the wit or charm of say, The Capitol Steps or Gallagher. That’s the kind of quick and incisive humor that we appreciate around here. Oh, and Carrot Top. That guy’s hilarious.
I am imagining you with a watermelon and a sledgehammer right now and I’m still not laughing. Help me out here, do you own a baseball hat with a ponytail attached? A giant tricycle?
Imagine me as an R-rated hypnotist -telling jokes that are just clean enough so that David and his blind date will laugh, while still remaining horribly unfunny.
Picture an audience full of people booing and hissing loudly, while the sultan of comedy and his lady of the evening guffaw and snort cheap pina coladas out of their nose.
I don’t know, I think that we prefer our political lampooning with a dash of musical theater. Can it really be funny if there is no singing? I would think that you would need props at the very least. I happen to know for a fact that oversized versions of everyday items, like telephones or paperclips will set most of us to rolling in the aisles.
As much as I would like to blame anything on Rove and the GOP, I recognize that a sucky football program has a lot to do with sucky coaches (not this year, obviously) and sucky administration (not sure if that has changed or not) and basically nothing to do with Rove and the GOP.
Global warming, cronyism, disdain for anyone who isn’t rich and living in a gated community, those are other issues. But Notre Dame football, nope.
If Rove can engineer two hurricanes to wipe out all the poor and blacks in the New Orleans ghetto, why couldn’t he engineer doom for Notre Dame and the cutting whit of Leahy??
I’ve just read through all of these comments. Honestly, I can’t really tell what the big beef is about, on either side. There must be “history” among you folks. Things I think are funny:
1.) The ND-Rove connection
2.) The first Zingers by Coach Leahy and Swarthington
3.) Mike’s adament defense of BushyWushy
4.) All of this cat-fighting
Honestly, nobody really believes that Bush had never seen a scanner just like nobody believes that Gore thought he invented the Internet. Both are examples of statements miscued by the press. But, both are pretty funny when you adopt the media interpretation. Just let it be funny.
What’s this? The cutting wit of Leahy is doomed? Why am I always the last to get the news? What will become of me? Perhaps I will diminish and go into the West….
That guy on Jeopardy was a humorless prick. Same for the dude that won Millionaire. Brilliant cats, but they wouldn’t know a joke if it smacked them upside the head with one of Ally’s night props.
I was addressing the fact that you seem to think you are witty, I did not at any point reference this particular joke, so the idea that I somehow missed the point suggests that is you rather than I who have a problem with readin comprehension. I can assure you that mine is quite fine.
And yes, I’m quite aware that Texican brought up the back-patting reference, I just thought it seemed to apply, as you and Swarthington seem to spend an inordinate amount of time telling each other how smart, right, intelligent, etc you are.
Oh, and the “we” seems to refer to the majority of people around here, but if you want names, I’m guessing Brendan, myself, Alasdair, Mike, Bea, even michael row, would seem to have indicated through their posts that they don’t find you at all as entertaining as you seem to think you are.
News Flash: “Zingers” on this blog are verboten. And Leahy and I are DEFINITELY NOT funny. Perhaps you slipped by the bouncer outside the front door who checks everyone who enters for the required stick up the butt.
If we take the letters - R O V E - out of the name of He Who Must Not Be Named, we find out who is behind He Who Must Not Be Named, because what is left is - D O L T and M!
Yup, He Who Must Not Be Named is really M. Rove Dolt - and is actually French, wouldntcha know !
Your sense of humor will NOT be well received in these parts. This is a serious blog for serious discussions, and the only form of humor permitted is the occasional F*CKING HILARIOUS PLAY ON WORDS: THE PUN.
If you’re a fan of Scrabble, and your singular achievement in life is succesful completion of the New York Times crossword puzzle (weekday version, let’s not get silly), dive right in.
Sorry Leahy, but I’m not some trained monkey ready to jump at your command. I unlike you, am not trying to claim I am witty or funny, or what not. When I am funny, if people think its funny, then it amuses them and I have done my job, I don’t need to go around saying how funny I am, or whining like you do. Seriously, how much of an ego do you have to have to conclude that because most people aren’t very amused by you that this blog communithy therefore hates humor. See thats your problem, you keep making this assumptions about everyone and everything around here with little to no evidence to back it up, and proclaim it from on high as if it were divinely inspired wisdom. I’ve seen people who behave like that on a regular basis, back when i was in junior high. It irritating back then and it still is.
You need to get over this superiority complex you seem to have (which is ironic considering the charges you level against everyone and their uncle around here) and quit trying to tell everyone how smart you are and how dumb they are, then maybe, just maybe people will start listening to some of your arugments. Maybe. Oh and btw, you still haven’t admitted your error from a previous thread, which since you claim that no one around here admits they are wrong except you, i’d assume you would be more than willng to do.
There is no objective standard of what’s funny. Some people find Leahy and perhaps myself to be funny, others don’t. Why pretend to be the Grand Poobah of What’s Funny with your menacing scowl and heavy gavel? And why pretend to represent the views of others like Michael Row? Even Brendan has tossed out a ‘LOL’ to the likes of me some posts back.
Alls I’m trying to say is that maybe, just maybe there is a high correlation between those who don’t find Leahy and myself to be funny with those who have oaken rods of not inconsiderable diameters lodged in their rectums (not that there’s anything wrong with that).
September 30th, 2005 at 12:08:46 pm
Don’t forget the revival that coincided with the good Irishman’s investigation!
September 30th, 2005 at 12:15:58 pm
As an aside to how screwed up DC is, I made a comment last year that even though Kerry was vanquished, it was a great year because the Sox triumphed. After I suggested that I would have willingly accepted such a tradeoff if offered it in August 2004, I was met with looks of horror by many at the dinner party.
What’s the matter with these people? Do they not realize it’s a game?*
*politics, that is.
September 30th, 2005 at 12:23:56 pm
I find the indictment that Bush the Elder didn’t know how a supermarket scanner worked quite amusing. In all honesty, how many people here actually know how one works without having to look it up? By that, I don’t mean “you scan the barcode and it identifies the item and price”, but the actual mechanism of how it’s scanned, how the barcode carries information that the scanner can pick up, etc. There are a few people here I’d bet on knowing (and I happen to know myself), but I’m betting that it’s only a small percentage of us who truly know this information. I would tend to believe that the American public at large would be even less likely to know, given that blog readers in general are more tech-savvy than the populace as a whole–so how is it that not knowing how a supermarket barcode scanner works is an indicator that a politician is out of touch with the public?
September 30th, 2005 at 12:26:01 pm
Mike,
Is that supposed to be funny or insightful? Just let me know, so I can either chuckle or scratch my head.
September 30th, 2005 at 12:41:44 pm
Neither. It’s mere curiosity. I have no problem lambasting the stupidity of either side of the political aisle, but I prefer such attacks to be reasonable. Laughing at Bush the Younger for his inability to speak properly is fine with me, as is laughing at Howard Dean for his impressive ability to jam his foot down his throat. But laughing at a politican for not knowing how a barcode scanner works seems rather far-fetched to me, as I don’t think most people really do know. Now if he were an electrical engineer who didn’t know how one worked, that would be another matter entirely…
September 30th, 2005 at 12:44:16 pm
Mike,
I think you missed the point. Perhaps you should peruse the blog a bit more.
Hint: it’s not real political criticism.
September 30th, 2005 at 1:06:15 pm
Mike,
You might want to get that knee checked out. I think you just jerked it out of alignment.
September 30th, 2005 at 1:08:06 pm
You ought to have the doc check your shoulder while he’s at it too. It’s gotta hurt to reach it all the way around to pat your back like that.
September 30th, 2005 at 1:11:42 pm
Coach, it’s obvious that it’s not a serious piece. It’s clearly a humor piece, as no one in their right mind would actually see a causal relationship between the existence of Karl Rove and the fate of ND football. But part of what makes satire amusing is the ability to play close enough to reality that it strikes a chord. In 1992, Bush the Elder really did say that he was amazed by the existence of supermarket scanners, and this was widely taken as a sign of his complete lack of touch with normal life, rather than the more reasonable notion that he was amazed by the technology being developed. And it’s this criticism which I was pointing out as being inherently amusing.
As an analogy, has anyone else seen the movie Series 7: THe Contenders? I caught it in the theaters about 3 years ago or so. It’s a satire on reality television shows; in this one, contestants are forced to compete, and the goal is to be the last one left alive. Make it through 3 rounds, and you get to stop competing. Part of what made it so funny were the extreme stereotypes of the various competitors: the 18-year-old girl with the ultimate soccer parents; the shell-shocked war vet; the nurse with very strong views about the need for euthanasia, the formerly-gay painter/cancer survivor, the lower-middle-class slob with a wife and kids, and the (returning champion) 8-month pregnant single woman who’s her family’s black sheep. The humor wouldn’t have been anywhere near as strong had the characters not obviously been charicatures of easily-identified stereotypes.
Basically, just because something’s humor doesn’t mean that there aren’t other points to be made with it. And if you’re going to try labelling me as a knee-jerk Republican, Swarthington, you’re going to provide a lot of amuement value yourself.
September 30th, 2005 at 1:36:47 pm
Mike,
My role here is not to judge you or anyone else. My role here is to circle around the perimeter of the herd seeking out the weak & the sickly. When I spot an individual perhaps a little slower than the rest, perhaps with a gimpy leg, I pounce, attempting to demean and belittle him or her.
What I do is perfectly natural and contributes to the health and viability of the herd in the long run. If I have not done my job well, then for that I am sorry and vow to do better next time.
September 30th, 2005 at 1:41:34 pm
Swarthy, if you honestly think that Mike, of all people, is “perhaps a little slower than the rest,” then no, you have not done your job well, not at all.
September 30th, 2005 at 1:49:36 pm
As for patting myself on the back: interesting. There are certain matter about which I happen to know a lot. Science is the predominant one–shocking, given that I’m a scientist. There are other matters in which I’m ignorant compared to the average amn on the street: sports statistics is a pretty obvious one (see the standings of Brendan’s football prediction contest for clear evidence of that). Neither of those make me inherently better or worse than anyone else, other than in that particular arena (ie, I’m a better scientist than most people, but I’m a worse football fan). But the main reason I even mentioned that I do know how a barcode scanner works is that I think it makes the fact that I don’t think it’s reasonable to criticize someone whose professional field is so far away from it stronger than it would be otherwise; if someone who does have this knowledge doesn’t think it’s terribly important for the average person to have, doesn’t that mean more than someone who doesn’t know it saying that it’s unimportant? If I said that I didn’t think a particular book was worth reading, wouldn’t the weight you put to my opinion be influenced by whether or not I had read the book myself? Was I also patting myself on the back earlier this week when I explained the reality of radiometric dating techniques, and why certain criticisms of them weren’t as strong as they might initially appear, as that’s another example of me displaying more knowledge about a particular subject than the average person would?
Myabe we just have different interpretations of the phrase, but to me, patting yourself on the back carries a connotation of praising yourself for something. I don’t really think that knowing or not knowing the details of how a supermarket scanner is cause for either praise or belittlement (unless it really does relate to your job), so that phrase just doesn’t seem to fit. At least in my view of the matter.
September 30th, 2005 at 1:52:15 pm
IQ does not necessarily equal quick wit. ;)
That guy on Jeopardy was a humorless prick. Same for the dude that won Millionaire. Brilliant cats, but they wouldn’t know a joke if it smacked them upside the head with one of Ally’s night props.
September 30th, 2005 at 2:06:15 pm
Just because we don’t find you or swarth funny doesn’t mean we are lacking in an understanding of wit. Sounds like you two are the ones too busy patting yourselves on the back for your cleverness (or lack there of).
September 30th, 2005 at 2:08:13 pm
David,
Who do you mean by “we”?
September 30th, 2005 at 2:13:58 pm
David,
I know that basic reading is a challenge for you, and that you soiled yourself in the corner in elementary school when the SRA books came out, but this latest offering is mind numbing even for you.
Neither I nor Swarthy wrote the joke in question, which, of course, is the matter at hand.
But feel free to lob another non sequitur our way, if you wish. You think they are hand grenades, but you always forget to pull the pin…
September 30th, 2005 at 2:20:04 pm
Alas, you two have none of the wit or charm of say, The Capitol Steps or Gallagher. That’s the kind of quick and incisive humor that we appreciate around here. Oh, and Carrot Top. That guy’s hilarious.
September 30th, 2005 at 2:21:39 pm
David,
Of course I’m sure you also missed the fact that it was Texican who brought up the back patting thing…;)
September 30th, 2005 at 2:25:25 pm
Coach Leahy,
I am imagining you with a watermelon and a sledgehammer right now and I’m still not laughing. Help me out here, do you own a baseball hat with a ponytail attached? A giant tricycle?
September 30th, 2005 at 2:31:45 pm
Imagine me as an R-rated hypnotist -telling jokes that are just clean enough so that David and his blind date will laugh, while still remaining horribly unfunny.
Picture an audience full of people booing and hissing loudly, while the sultan of comedy and his lady of the evening guffaw and snort cheap pina coladas out of their nose.
September 30th, 2005 at 2:44:18 pm
I don’t know, I think that we prefer our political lampooning with a dash of musical theater. Can it really be funny if there is no singing? I would think that you would need props at the very least. I happen to know for a fact that oversized versions of everyday items, like telephones or paperclips will set most of us to rolling in the aisles.
September 30th, 2005 at 3:31:48 pm
Sweet Pics of Purdue grad Kyle Orton gettin’ t-rashed at Iowa City bars … from Wenesday or Thursday night … check it out!
September 30th, 2005 at 3:45:21 pm
As much as I would like to blame anything on Rove and the GOP, I recognize that a sucky football program has a lot to do with sucky coaches (not this year, obviously) and sucky administration (not sure if that has changed or not) and basically nothing to do with Rove and the GOP.
Global warming, cronyism, disdain for anyone who isn’t rich and living in a gated community, those are other issues. But Notre Dame football, nope.
September 30th, 2005 at 3:50:21 pm
Angrier,
Per usual, you hit the ball outta the park, dude.
September 30th, 2005 at 4:01:20 pm
If Rove can engineer two hurricanes to wipe out all the poor and blacks in the New Orleans ghetto, why couldn’t he engineer doom for Notre Dame and the cutting whit of Leahy??
Maybe Leahy is KARL ROVE!!!!!
Swarthy must be his evil twin KARL ROVE!!!!
It all makes sense now…
September 30th, 2005 at 4:07:10 pm
I’ve just read through all of these comments. Honestly, I can’t really tell what the big beef is about, on either side. There must be “history” among you folks. Things I think are funny:
1.) The ND-Rove connection
2.) The first Zingers by Coach Leahy and Swarthington
3.) Mike’s adament defense of BushyWushy
4.) All of this cat-fighting
Honestly, nobody really believes that Bush had never seen a scanner just like nobody believes that Gore thought he invented the Internet. Both are examples of statements miscued by the press. But, both are pretty funny when you adopt the media interpretation. Just let it be funny.
September 30th, 2005 at 4:11:01 pm
What’s this? The cutting wit of Leahy is doomed? Why am I always the last to get the news? What will become of me? Perhaps I will diminish and go into the West….
September 30th, 2005 at 4:12:25 pm
I think that Mike was actually arguing semantics, not defending anyone. Mike enjoys doing this, and we allow him this pleasure.
September 30th, 2005 at 4:12:48 pm
Leahy,
You wrote:
IQ does not necessarily equal quick wit. ;)
That guy on Jeopardy was a humorless prick. Same for the dude that won Millionaire. Brilliant cats, but they wouldn’t know a joke if it smacked them upside the head with one of Ally’s night props.
I was addressing the fact that you seem to think you are witty, I did not at any point reference this particular joke, so the idea that I somehow missed the point suggests that is you rather than I who have a problem with readin comprehension. I can assure you that mine is quite fine.
And yes, I’m quite aware that Texican brought up the back-patting reference, I just thought it seemed to apply, as you and Swarthington seem to spend an inordinate amount of time telling each other how smart, right, intelligent, etc you are.
Oh, and the “we” seems to refer to the majority of people around here, but if you want names, I’m guessing Brendan, myself, Alasdair, Mike, Bea, even michael row, would seem to have indicated through their posts that they don’t find you at all as entertaining as you seem to think you are.
September 30th, 2005 at 4:15:29 pm
Nug,
News Flash: “Zingers” on this blog are verboten. And Leahy and I are DEFINITELY NOT funny. Perhaps you slipped by the bouncer outside the front door who checks everyone who enters for the required stick up the butt.
September 30th, 2005 at 4:26:19 pm
An OVERSIZED stick up the butt might be funny. A regular sized one isn’t.
September 30th, 2005 at 4:35:33 pm
Maybe Leahy is KARL ROVE!!!!!
Swarthy must be his evil twin KARL ROVE!!!!
LOL Charles…
September 30th, 2005 at 4:48:10 pm
If we take the letters - R O V E - out of the name of He Who Must Not Be Named, we find out who is behind He Who Must Not Be Named, because what is left is - D O L T and M!
Yup, He Who Must Not Be Named is really M. Rove Dolt - and is actually French, wouldntcha know !
Is there nothing too diabolical for Karl ?
September 30th, 2005 at 5:00:28 pm
yes, he does not use the cow trebuchet.
September 30th, 2005 at 5:14:30 pm
Nug,
Your sense of humor will NOT be well received in these parts. This is a serious blog for serious discussions, and the only form of humor permitted is the occasional F*CKING HILARIOUS PLAY ON WORDS: THE PUN.
If you’re a fan of Scrabble, and your singular achievement in life is succesful completion of the New York Times crossword puzzle (weekday version, let’s not get silly), dive right in.
September 30th, 2005 at 5:26:22 pm
Leahy, we enjoy humor here quite a bit,you just don’t happen to be as funny as you think you are.
September 30th, 2005 at 5:30:06 pm
Like this?:
Maybe Leahy is KARL ROVE!!!!!
Swarthy must be his evil twin KARL ROVE!!!!
LOL Charles…
September 30th, 2005 at 5:30:47 pm
Actually, tests have been run on Leahy. Turns out he is actually funnier than he thinks he is.
September 30th, 2005 at 5:32:28 pm
Now that’s funny.
September 30th, 2005 at 5:39:43 pm
The meter don’t lie.
Davie,
Say one funny thing in the next hour. And no, the fact that your cat knocked over your water glass is not funny.
September 30th, 2005 at 5:48:41 pm
Sorry Leahy, but I’m not some trained monkey ready to jump at your command. I unlike you, am not trying to claim I am witty or funny, or what not. When I am funny, if people think its funny, then it amuses them and I have done my job, I don’t need to go around saying how funny I am, or whining like you do. Seriously, how much of an ego do you have to have to conclude that because most people aren’t very amused by you that this blog communithy therefore hates humor. See thats your problem, you keep making this assumptions about everyone and everything around here with little to no evidence to back it up, and proclaim it from on high as if it were divinely inspired wisdom. I’ve seen people who behave like that on a regular basis, back when i was in junior high. It irritating back then and it still is.
You need to get over this superiority complex you seem to have (which is ironic considering the charges you level against everyone and their uncle around here) and quit trying to tell everyone how smart you are and how dumb they are, then maybe, just maybe people will start listening to some of your arugments. Maybe. Oh and btw, you still haven’t admitted your error from a previous thread, which since you claim that no one around here admits they are wrong except you, i’d assume you would be more than willng to do.
September 30th, 2005 at 5:52:08 pm
David,
There is no objective standard of what’s funny. Some people find Leahy and perhaps myself to be funny, others don’t. Why pretend to be the Grand Poobah of What’s Funny with your menacing scowl and heavy gavel? And why pretend to represent the views of others like Michael Row? Even Brendan has tossed out a ‘LOL’ to the likes of me some posts back.
Alls I’m trying to say is that maybe, just maybe there is a high correlation between those who don’t find Leahy and myself to be funny with those who have oaken rods of not inconsiderable diameters lodged in their rectums (not that there’s anything wrong with that).
September 30th, 2005 at 5:55:38 pm
David,
You won.
September 30th, 2005 at 5:58:38 pm
And, to refute your point, it is generally accepted that if you refer to someone’s opinion as “ridiculously stupid”, that you have insulted them.
Don’t misunderstand, I relish your loathing. It is like a warm breeze on the beach, or a firm Colombian heiney.
September 30th, 2005 at 5:58:41 pm
NOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO! Leahy is one of them now. NOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO! Coach? Coach? COACH!!!!!!!!
September 30th, 2005 at 5:59:06 pm
Whoooo. Never mind, you’re back.
September 30th, 2005 at 6:08:04 pm
Swarthy,
I never left. I was just being sporting. David’s gut buster slayed me, what can I say?
September 30th, 2005 at 6:15:06 pm
Wait a sec, 2:50 makes it sound chillingly possible that A&A is a Notre Dame grad.
Ralph Neas, I thought you were busy digging up dirt on Prez. Bush’s nominees right about now?
Or is that you, Bruce Babbit?