savethehumans.com Logo
 
 
about us feedback FAQ
  links submissions 
10,000 Frenchmen
  (people and discussion)
 

STH Newsletter
Occasional updates, plus bonus idiotic ramblings. (We've never sent more than one e-mail per month.)


Go back to: home 10,000 frenchmen main comment page

Comments, Love Letters, and Death Threats
Comment Archive 23
 

The posts below were made from Oct. 3, 2005 to Jan. 3, 2006.

You can also visit our previous comment archive.

To make a post, please visit the main comment page.


Name: Kfu Mike
Subject: Another Objectivist Disappoints

I think you need to start your own faction of objectivism - you know like the Kellyites did. I became "disgusted" with the U of M campus objectivist club because more emphasis was put on the fact that I favored (at the time) Green Day* over Rachmaninov and the fact that although I agreed with 98% of what Rand wrote, I thought her argument against a woman president was pretty weak.

The word 'fuck' should be in the organization title somewhere. I'll join, maybe in an officer type roll - how much would you pay the Secretary of New Music reviews?

* Along with any new releases by The Foo Fighters (or the Brother's Gibb), I will never buy another Green Day album.

Editor's Note: Actually, I think it's time I buy a Bee Gees album. If I hire you, you might be required to review it. And if you don't like it, I might have to fire you. (JR)

January 3, 2006 at 08:44:32


Name: ...
Subject: ur a fuckin wanker

well hi there, just so u know i dont agree with the whole treat waitress and waiters like shit thing! they have a life unlike u! i'm sure ur some lonely old 49 year old man with nothing better to than dis other people, only because u really hate ur self, and u cant get ur lazy old ass a REAL job! go to hell mother fucker!

Editor's Note: Even though I'm younger and not lonely, I still object to the whole treat lonlely old men like shit thing. (JR)

December 31, 2005 at 02:28:02


Name: Ginevra Morgan
E-mail: ginevram@hotmail.com
Subject: Real Women Don't Particularly Care

I don't think you entirely understand the aims of this movie. Although it may be tacky, all it's trying to do is reinforce a positive image of girls who aren't necessarily the size of a supermodel. It's trying to level the playing field, if you will. Although I believe that females in general are for too obsessed with body image, myself not an exception, the media is not helping. Don't worry I'm not one of those anti-media freaks, I don't believe that the media is one big vicious, malicious monster targeting innocent, impressionable young girls, as it is these girls that fuel it, but it is my dream that one day the ideal beautiful image will be far more realistic and healthy. This movie has tried to fight a losing battle against the well established image of beauty coming with thinness.

Editor's Note: Unbelievably, I'm still not bored answering these carbon-copy reactions. Maybe I'm the idiot. I always knew that feminists were fucking nuts, I just never realized they were this stupid. Take a look at the subtitle of that article, which I added months ago specifically to save women like this a few minutes of their time. But as far as this idea of an unrealistic ideal body image is getting to be such as tedious cliché. How about we define our terms and our contexts? An adult male has his ideal image of a woman's body. These images differ, by the way. The image seen on most media is often reflective of most males' ideal woman (though not always). Then, we have the concept of the ideal body image that we should present to young girls. If you want to tell me that society at large, and parents in particular, are overwhelming presenting an unhealthy image of the female body as an ideal to young girls, then you must also have a nice bridge you could sell me. And by "unhealthy", I'm talking about an unhealthy body, not some kind of bullshit sense of intimidation. Just because there are some chunky girls who feel bad about being chunky, that's no justification for wanting to "level the playing field" by recruiting more Queen Latifahs and firing all the Scarlett Johanssons. Teach your damn kid that if she wants to be an actress, she should learn how to act, for fuck's sake. Similarly, if she wants to be a marathon runner, she might want to start doing a little running. (JR)

December 30, 2005 at 03:35:48


Name: Miss Fabiola Thing
Subject: Anti-Cloning Pussies and the People Against Cloning Cats

Ok, so I don't know all those fancy schmancy Greek words to describe argument fallacies, however, I sure there is one for your assertion that anti-cloners are against all conveniences and advances brought to us by technology/science. How the hell do you make the leap from "cloning pets is wrong" to "I love to clean my clothes by beating them against rocks in a river!"

Frankly, you sound like a very unhappy, mean, bitter son of a bitch whose mother was convinced you'd be the first Jewish president of the United States, and now you're just pissed as hell because not everyone you meet thinks you're the Second Coming. I also do not believe that "Man - every man - is an end in himself, not the means to the ends of others. He must exist for his own sake, neither sacrificing himself to others nor sacrificing others to himself. The pursuit of his own rational self-interest and of his own happiness is the highest moral purpose of his life."

P.S. You obviously know nothing about cats. They all have their own special fuzzy personalities. So there, ya big meanie! And stupid Texas twats with big hair and fake boobs and trout lips who want to clone their pets should have to volunteer in an animal shelter for a couple of weeks before actually going through with the cloning. After all, "Reality exists as an objective absolute - facts are facts, independent of man's feelings, wishes, hopes or fears."

Editor's Note: I'll remember to ask my mom if she ever thought I'd convert to Judaism and then run for president. I told her a million times that I wanted to be the second Buddhist governor of California. (I'll give you points for doing a little research into Objectivism in order to grab those quotes and reject them. Of course, I'd recommend more research.) (JR)

December 29, 2005 at 13:28:15


Name: JayMan
E-mail: jaymanone@excite.com
Subject: Why Buffalo wings are called Buffalo wings

Buffalo wings were first made at the Anchor Bar in Buffalo, New York. They are deep fried, then covered (shaken) in a mixture of butter and Frank's Red Hot Sauce. Thus, they are the best tasting (yet absolutely worst for you) food known to man.

They are NOT breaded. They do NOT have BBQ sauce on them. If they do, they are NOT buffalo wings.

See http://www.anchorbar.com/.

Also, cool site!

Editor's Note: I actually had to edit what I wrote to clarify that it's the "seasoning" (hot sauce) that makes a buffalo wing. The last thing I want to do is give the impression that I think buffalo wings need to be breaded. (Blasphemy!) Not only do I know about the Anchor Bar, but a friend and I stopped in Buffalo on a road trip specifically for the purpose of making a pilgrimage there. (I have a fire extinguisher key chain that says "I survived Suicidal at the Anchor Bar" to prove it.) The place is holy to me. Incidentally, I'm also someone who's once received a gallon jug of RedHot as a Christmas present, so I'm a huge fan of that sauce, too. And you reminded me that I wanted to e-mail the company and tell them to immediately halt production of that new "Buffalo Wing" sauce they started making. The original RedHot is the only one anyone needs! (JR)

December 29, 2005 at 11:15:44


Name: becky
Subject: 44 fun things to do

i think this is a gr8 website and is well funny i will be sure to try some of the things out in the unlucky tesco store next time i go to get my shopping or even on a rainy day when im bored hehe

Editor's Note: How do you like that, I'm exporting stupidity all the way to the United Kingdom. (JR)

December 29, 2005 at 04:37:28


Name: K Hampson
E-mail: camaro-1987@hotmail.com
Subject: Your message from god

I just wanted to mention that you have over-looked the most pressing issue of the whole thing. If there is going to be a flood and you need to save the animals, then don't you need to save humanity as well.

Noah took his wife and there kids, and there kids wives and husbands so they could re-poppulate the world after the flood. So wouldn't you need to do the same thing?

So following this new line if reasoning you would need to find a wife. Not just any wife either, she would need to be one special girl. Firstly she would have to like animals a lot, as she will no doubt be the one cleaning up after them. Secondly she needs be able fertile and willing to have children, and not just one or two, more like 6 or seven. I mean you can't just have one, what if it's gay? Or can't find a partner? Thirdly she would also have to be a hard worker as I am sure rebuilding the world after the flood will take some effort.

So once you have found the wife (good luck) and had your kids (who you will have to be tested to make sure they are all able to reproduce) then you need to find them all partners (who also need tests done not only to be sure they can reproduce, but so you can be sure the new race won't all be infected with herpies).

So perhaps you should ammend your prayer to god and ask him if he could possibly ask a woman to take over the huge tast of saving humanity. we all know how hard it is to convinve a chick to sleep with you, let alone save humanity with you. However men will do just about anything to get in a girls pants, even if it means he has to save humanity.

Editor's Note: Damn, I didn't think about the whole "saving the human race" part of it. I guess I was just thinking of the damn animals. Well, slap my ass and call me a PETA supporter. (JR)

December 29, 2005 at 03:59:13


Name: K Hampson
E-mail: camaro-1987@hotmail.com
Subject: Pick-up lines

This site is great, it's been ages since I laughed so much. I love the low percentage pick-up lines. They make good personal messages for msn messenger... Keep them coming.

I do have a question for you though. Do u think women are vapid, capricious and insensate creatures?

The site reads to me as though your experience with mindful women is limited, if thats true please don't allow this to give you the perception that all women are simpltons, (though some are) there are many of us who are quite capable of holding an intelligent conversation.

Editor's Note: Thanks. (Permission to use the pick-up lines on MSN Messenger granted.) Jesus, you used such great words, you almost make it sound romantic to be vapid, capricious, and insensate. I have met intelligent, rational women, one of whom is my girlfriend. But it is true that many are ditzy, nonintellectual, and emotionalistic. I judge each individually; unfortunately, I happened to have judged many of them in this way. (JR)

December 29, 2005 at 03:30:17


Name: nick collicott
E-mail: ducky2003@sbcglobal.net
Subject: wow

this site is awesome

Editor's Note: I do what I can. (JR)

December 28, 2005 at 21:23:22


Name: derek
E-mail: dsrushforth@yahoo.com
Subject: objectism

Hey I am relativly new to this site, which as of now, I find entertaining. Although I am familiar with satire in general, will someone inform/explain the general term of objectism to me? While reading earlier, I ran across a phrase relating somewhat to "Objectism...ever since i gave up the concept of God." As of now, I am assuming Objectism is a point of view/ philosophy. I am indeed a Christian and although i do view a few of these responses on here bad, I am interested in the philosophy as a whole. Thanks for your time and forgive any mispellings(high school only does so much.) -derek

Editor's Note: Derek, I'm glad you find the site entertaining, for the time being, anyway. The philosophy you're referring to is called "Objectivism", and is the one created (and/or discovered) by author Ayn Rand. Probably the most radical aspect of the philosophy is the moral tenet of "rational selfishness". This is the belief that long-term happiness on Earth (i.e., not after death) is the primary purpose of life, and that each individual has the responsibility and right to sustain his own life, without sacrificing himself to others, or others to himself. (The typical package-deal definition of "selfishness" is that if you live for yourself, you must necessarily step all over the rights of everybody else in order to get what you want. Rand was the first to say, essentially, "Who the fuck says so?") As far as the name "Objectivism": Rand's preferred name would have been "existentialism" due to the term's focus on life as an end in itself. However, since that was already taken (and had an inaccurate connotation), she came up with "Objectivism". This really refers to the defining trait of the philosophy. Objectivism holds that existence, or reality, exists independently from the observer, and consciousness (you might say "soul") consists of that which identifies existence. Therefore, Objectivism holds that existence is primary, not requiring consciousness. (Contrast this with Christianity, which holds that God's consciousness is primary.) Objectivism gets its name from the identification that human beings, using reason, have the capacity to know and understand objective reality. Following from the morality of rational self-interest, Objectivists also advocate laissez-faire capitalism, as the only moral political-economic system. I recommend Ayn Rand's novel "The Fountainhead" as the best introduction to her philosophy, but mostly as a great, inspiring novel about an architect who battles against the world for the sake of his own values. If you have any other questions, let me know. (JR)

December 24, 2005 at 16:24:43


Name: James Hughes
E-mail: Jamesshrugged@aol.com
Website: theaynrandforum.com
Subject: HBL

Jason,

I'm sorry to hear about your treatment at the HBL. I certainly agree with you on "Ayn Rand Answers" and I thought your list was very funny. I was just considering signing up for the HBL, but I think I'll reconsider.

Best wishes,

James Hughes

Editor's Note: Thanks for the compliment; you should sign up if it interests you, though. It's a good discussion list. (JR)

December 23, 2005 at 17:20:50


Name: AL
Subject: none

I LIKE WILL AND GRACE!

Editor's Note: I understand why you didn't leave your last name or e-mail address. (JR)

December 23, 2005 at 15:40:31


Name: Felix
E-mail: FelixKamieth@gmx.de
Subject: You missed the best movie

Have you ever seen "The Edge" with Anthony Hopkins. It even beats the shit out of "The Shawnshank Redemption". It's my favorite with SR being second. You should watch it. It's mandatory for everone who even remotely likes Objectivism.
Merry Christmas,
Felix.

Editor's Note: The whole "bear" thing never interested me, but ok, I'll give it a shot. It is Mamet, after all. (JR)

December 23, 2005 at 13:04:36


Name: geoff
Subject: "Another Objectivist Disappoints..."

As much as Objectivism needs more individuals like Mr. Binswanger --informed, articulate, and philosphically consistent-- speaking on its behalf, it also desperately needs more individuals like you, Jason --informed, articulate, philosophically consistent, and possessing of a good (and, when contextually appropriate, good and filthy) sense of humor.

It's a shame you were booted from HB's List.

Editor's Note: Thanks, Geoff. As the 16-year-old chick said to her whiny girlfriend, "It's his loss." I was the one sending the check, for Christ's sake. (JR)

December 23, 2005 at 11:45:05


Name: J. D. Lees
E-mail: johnlees@mts.net
Website: www.g-fan.com
Subject: HBL eviction

Jason: I'm an Objectivist and I enjoy your site very much. I think there's humor in pretty much everything, and as one who wishes Objectivism to conquer all forms of irrationality, it disturbs me that prominent Objectivists seem so hostile and belittling to potential allies who may not toe their line 100%. Attitudes and rhetoric like that of Mr. Binswanger work to stymie the growth of Objectivism. Please keep on doing what you're doing; people like you are the human face of Objectivism.

Editor's Note: Thank you, John. I will keep on keepin' on. (JR)

December 23, 2005 at 11:36:02


Name: William
E-mail: wbeaumo1@aol.com
Subject: The HBL debacle

This saddens and disappoints me. It's hard enough as it is to defend Objectivism against the 'cult' smear without stories like yours. On the one hand, I feel frustration that adherents to a philosophy that stresses objectivity would so rudely and abruptly cut you off because of one page on your site. I feel like arguing that your site is one flavor of Objectivism and HBL is another flavor. On the other hand, I know that the 'multiple flavors' argument has the danger of disintegrating into arguing for Objectivism to have no solid identity. Aargh, what a quandary. Anyway, I hope your own Objectivist convictions remain solid in spite of it all.

Editor's Note: Thanks, to you and the others, for having the balls to write you've written. Although what happened is disappointing, and makes me feel a little lonely, I can distinguish between Ayn Rand's philosophy and the particular people who practice it. I'm not 100% consistent myself (though I aim to be), and if there's one cliché I agree with, it's "people in glass houses shouldn't throw stones". The throwing of stones isn't all bad, just make sure you're not throwing them for reasons that apply equally to yourself. "Imperfection" is not a sufficient reason for me to start throwing. (JR)

December 23, 2005 at 04:05:22


Name: Michael
E-mail: spitler_mike@hotmail.com
Subject: This is why I only buy online porn instead of HBL

Hey man, long time no updates. Nice that you finally got some new stuff for us to read, but before I finish the rest of it I decided to comment on this because this really pisses me off. I mean seriously, all members of HBL are adults right? Adults should be able to discuss sensitive issues rationally and openly right? I guess in your case they were not.

A few years back I read an article that made me seriously doubt the integrity of many so called "authorities" of Objectivism. I reserved judgement then, because I didn't know if it was true or not, but reading of your experience makes me think now when I look at it again that the guy may be right. Here is the URL.

What bothers me is that there are so many pseudo-Objectivists out there that anyone who openly admires Ayn Rand's philosopy and tries to practice it becomes suspect. I fear that some people are so busy reading what Ayn Rand said that they neglect to use their own minds. To be honest with you, I have a really hard time understanding and integrating into my mind what Ayn Rand says in "Introduction to Objectivist Epistomology" or keeping straight what the meanings of all those big words are. In the end I just put the book down and thought for a bit, coming up with my own justification for why it isn't ok to kill or steal from people. It isn't enough to go beyond a double spaced, 12pt font page but it works for me. I contextualized it too!

I just think that if we are really going to make a difference we need to stop relying on self-appointed authority figures to speak for us. We all have brains and we dont need "leaders" to draw conclusions from the facts of reality for us. There will always be a place for experts but we cannot let them think for us or judge for us.

My only theory about why they might have canceled your subscription is that maybe the reason they edited Rand's words is because perhaps she misspoke about something, and they didn't want people to know that Ayn Rand makes mistakes like every other human being has throughout history. Perhaps she made an error, perhaps not, we will never know because that guy never lets us know what he edited and what the original words were. Hell, in my copy of Shakespeare's play King Lear the explanatory notes explain changes to the wordings from the origional folio. How hard is it to note changes to words that Ayn Rand said? They probably didn't want their authority questioned and decided to silence you for it. Binswanger didn't bar you from the list when he first saw your list, even though he thought it was aweful. He did remove you later when you questioned their reasons for editing Rand's own words. The only thing disgusting about this whole situation was how they treated you.

Editor's Note: Just to clarify something: I'm sure Binswanger didn't realize, when I rejoined HBL, that I was the person who had written the list. He probably didn't even remember seeing the list a few years ago. It's clear that it was him seeing the list recently, not my post about Ayn Rand Answers, that got me kicked off of HBL. (As I mentioned, he did allow my post to be distributed, even if he got Mayhew's permission first.) You say, "we need to stop relying on self-appointed authority figures to speak for us". But I've never relied on anyone to speak for me, as this site shows. The value I've obtained from Binswanger and others is their knowledge of Objectivism, both for my own clarification and for those new to Objectivism (since I would like the philosophy to spread throughout the culture, and Binswanger is good at doing this). I read the page you linked to (up to and including the quoted letter from Peikoff). Given the context presented, I don't disagree with Peikoff. It's perfectly fine for him to say "none of your business" to a guy who seemed to be lecturing him. He did say, quite fairly in my opinion, that he just wanted "the courtesy of a polite question as to my policy regarding you and the Reismans". Without knowing any of the details, his policy sounds like Wal-Mart's policy (which I don't know if they still have) of only dealing with companies who use FedEx. It's not up to Wal-Mart to explain why they need to use FedEx. Other companies just need to decide whether they want to deal with Wal-Mart, given the conditions. (JR)

December 22, 2005 at 01:33:50


Name: Monica
Subject: Oh, funny!

Hey, this is my new favorite website!

Editor's Note: If you thought that was funny, you should read some of the things that are supposed to be funny. You'll get a real kick out of them. (JR)

December 22, 2005 at 00:53:16


Name: 'Wen
Subject: HBL e-mails

Just wanted to say I had belonged to HBL for about 2 years before I was somewhat dissatisfied with it and canceled my membership. My boyfriend is presently on the list, however, and enjoys it. I just wanted to offer support and to tell you that my boyfriend and I have seen Dangerous Beauty and enjoyed it (although we are both under 30), but the kicker is it was recommended by my mother who is in her late 40s, and *she* was recommended the film by a friend who is in his mid-40s. None of us in the chain of recommendations have found the sex scenes particularly graphic or lewd. In fact, they're fairly tasteful given the many avenues the filmmakers could have chosen for presenting a courtesan. I just wanted to pass on those facts for you and anyone over 30 on your website who may want to watch the film.

Editor's Note: Thanks. You're right, Dangerous Beauty is a movie for adults, but not a freakin' porno. (JR)

December 21, 2005 at 20:42:05


Name: David Buchner
E-mail: buchner@wcta.net
Website: customer.wcta.net/buchner
Subject: Well, that sucks (re: HBL)

Oh cripes, not you too. I've seen this sort of thing too many times already. I can't for the life of me figure out what's going on here -- other than people don't read carefully enough. Maybe they skim, don't look for confirmation, and just leap to the conclusion, "Oh it's another one of those foul-mouthed sneering detractors."

Kinda like when I complain about taxes, and somebody blows up with "goddamn I'm so tired of these religious fanatic Republican fascists taking this country down the toilet!!"

Maybe Objectivists are so accustomed to being treated like witches that they've become thin-skinned and always expecting of a fight. "Quick to outrage," anyone?

For what it's worth, I've never found you anything but ruthlessly on-target in presenting the values of Objectivism. I think you're a refreshingly passionate (and often even articulate!) advocate of Ayn Rand's ideas.

(PS the relevant FIREFLY quote for you here might be, "wasn't looking for a fight... always do seem to find one, though...")

Editor's Note: Great Firefly quote, and thanks for the support. I think your evaluation is probably right, but the quick-to-outrage reaction is a long-term thing, not just a momentary one. Even my attempt to discuss the issue went unanswered. It reminds me of a Q&A session with Binswanger a few years back (I think a tape of it is on sale on aynrandbookstore.com). One of the written questions that was submitted to him, which he read aloud, was about why some people think Objectivism is a cult. The only part of his answer that I remember was something like (to paraphrase from memory): "I know the person who wrote this question, this person is not an Objectivist and the Objectivism movement does not want him." My thought at the time was, "Why give so much significance to an anonymous questioner when you have an audience of people in front of you who are interested in what you think?" The funny thing is, I think I know who he was talking about, and I agreed with him. Still, it came across as a little anal-retentive. Let's put it this way, it's not how Francisco d'Anconia would have responded. Nevertheless, I intend to buy many more of Binswanger's lectures, assuming I don't get blacklisted from the Ayn Rand Bookstore, too. (JR)

December 21, 2005 at 09:57:18


Name: Willa
E-mail: wildwill@antdevc.com
Website: www.choosealoo.com
Subject: The age old question

Hi there

I have started a site as a experiment to see what cubical in a restroom people use, Its a little off the wall but a question that i am sure a vast majority of the world population have thought about!

Willa

Editor's Note: I'd choose the last stall. (JR)

December 12, 2005 at 14:57:25


Name: Pastor Jonathan Williams
Subject: Jesse Helms

Dear Sir,

During the month of September, you wrote an article concerning Jesse Helms and abortion. You refered to aborted babies as being "potential human beings". This is a very ignorant statement considering that the human heart develops first, therefore proving there to be life inside! Of course they haven't been born yet for your kind to propagandize their minds into dung, but they are still living! It is very unfortunate that your mother, as well as many other mothers, didn't abort you liberal communist pigs when they had the chance. No, they instead gave you a chance at living and deciding on life for yourself. They didn't suck you from the womb with a "Vaccum object" and throw you in a garbage bag. Nor did they use their unwanted pregnancies to proffiteer off of Christian values and demoralize this Country. Instead they let you live, so that you could spit in their faces, and tell them that life isn't really worth the trouble. Not being a Christian, you surely have NO morality anyway! But I am sure you are glad your mother had enough not to kill you off before exiting the womb!
--
Pastor Jonathan Williams
Senior Pastor
CJCC/ AN
www.twelvearyannations.com

Editor's Note: I wasn't "me" when "I" was a clump of cells. Nor was "I" "me" the year before my conception. If it would have been immoral for my mother to abort a clump of cells, it would have been immoral for her not to have conceived me every moment before she actually did. Think of all the wasted, potential life that failed to exist. I must say, to get an angry post from a neo-Nazi right after an angry post from a black guy accusing me of racism couldn't be a better Christmas present. (JR)

December 8, 2005 at 14:08:13


Name: Travis
E-mail: dontb_9@hotmail.com
Subject: FUCK YOU!!!!!!!!!!!!

fuck YOU BITCH BLACK PPL JUST AS TALENTED AS YOU IF YOU HAVE A PROBLEM ILL FUCK U UP BITCH

Editor's Note: You have proven, by reading the entire article and writing something so irrelevant in response, that black people are not only just as talented as white people, but also just as intelligent. (JR)

December 1, 2005 at 17:25:49


Name: Anastasia Beaverhausen
Subject: Alaska Air prayer cards

First of all: get a life. You are one of those annoying people on the street capable of working but instead stand in front of Starbuck's and ask for some change.

Second of all: If you think Alaska is mediocre I can give you a short list of other airlines, currently in bankruptcy, that have a long way to go just to achieve "mediocre." Fly them next time because Alaska will do just fine without you.

And as for the prayer cards: I too have a dislike for them. The pilots fly the planes that get you to your destination in one piece. They have nothing to do with the prayer cards. So when you deplane just say thank you and move on; no comments are needed from the peaunt gallery. The prayer cards have been on board Alaska jets since the late 60's when the then CEO added them to the meal trays because he was and is a christian. He is no longer the CEO but sits on the board. Rumor has it that when he goes the prayer cards will go. The airline keeps stats though its Customer Relations department that tracks the positive and negative comments regarding the cards. I have been told through well placed sources that the current stats are 69% favorable/31% unfavorable.

Again, Jason, get a job and get life. Leave me alone when I go to Starbuck's you fucking piece of shit.

Anastasia (like Russian royalty)
Beaverhausen (like where the beaver lives)

Editor's Note: If I were on the Alaska Airlines board, the first thing I'd do, right after removing the Bible quote cards, is to institute a special sycophant-of-the-month bonus just for you. (JR)

November 30, 2005 at 02:12:36


Name: look up "creation science"
Subject: Evolution is a religion

Just wanna know what u believe in? Whether or not u believe in the Bible..... U must believe something, and if it is Evolution....AGAIN, IT IS A RELIGION....just as much or MORE than any other religion...but i'm sure u know that right???

So, why don't u tear up the "theory" of Evolution for me...or is that what u BELIEVE?

My point here is I could very well sit back and tear the theory of Evolution to shreds!!!! Piece of cake......CAN YOU???

Oh, and by the way...something as simple as all of the animals in the world being on Noah's Ark.....U ONLY NEED 2 OF EACH cause dogs, wolfs, coyotes, dingos, etc are all one "kind" and.....u only need 2 of each "kind" as it states in the Bible. NOT 2 Pugs, 2 wolfs, 2 coyotes even....just 2 of each "kind"

It just really seems obvious to me that u haven't done your homework on "creation science"....which is the "other side of the coin" (just like any judge...in order to make a good decision...u need both sides of the story).....and you clearly haven't done so....just from one example you can see for yourself...and THIS IS JUST ONE!!!!!!!!!!!

HOW AM I DOING????

SHAKEN UP AT ALL???

I KNOW YOU WILL EITHER NOT POST THIS...OR...U WILL "WORK AROUND" WHAT I HAVE WRITTEN. Cause God knows it takes more than a few paragraphs ...EITHER WAY...PLEASE ADMIT TO YOURSELF THAT U HAVE NOT STUDIED "THE OTHER SIDE OF THE COIN" VERY MUCH AT ALL. (if at all...cause if you don't understand micro-evolution and specie variations you really can't know much on this subject) :):):):):):)

p.s.
Same goes with insects and the flood....(just imagine the floating debris) IN OTHER WORDS, Noah didn't have to have these on the ARK!!!

THANX ANYWAYS FOR YOUR VIEW ON THINGS....it's interesting to see how even the simplest things can get so mixed up eh?? :):):)

JOHNNY xoxoxo hahahaha

There is always another side to the story...don't forget this!!!!

Editor's Note: It's impressive that you can use the phrases "creation science" and "evolution is a religion" like you believe both are legitimate, and still your head doesn't explode. Even so, you might want to prepare for that eventuality, so how about tying a plastic bag over your head? Make sure the bag is nice and tight. If you're able to breathe, it means the blood still might splatter. By the way, your comment about two of each "kind" of animal is funny as hell; I just love your precise definition of "kind". But why two dogs and two wolves? Why not two four-legged mammals, two brown ones, two mammals, or two non-winged creatures bigger than a bread box? But here's a guy who takes your nonsense to an even more ridiculous level. ("Remember there are really only a few very large animals, such as the dinosaur or the elephant, and these could be represented by young ones.") You do have a good point about the "floating debris". But if that's the case, then why did God also ask Noah to take "fowl" on board? Couldn't they rest on that floating debris? You'd think, at the very least, the birds could take turn flying around, sort of like a big performance of bird juggling. And if that were the case, he wouldn't really need to do anything, except tell the birds where the ship was and his approximate time of departure. "Hey, birds! We're leaving in one hour. We request that all birds scheduled for an initial period of on-board rest be here on time! However, all birds must be present to receive their wrist band, or risk being refused entry to the ship after the flood starts." Or was "fowl" a "kind" of animal like "the dinosaur" and only required two total? Man, if Noah only had to store two of any bird, that bastard really got off light. (JR)

November 29, 2005 at 00:02:11


Name: meg
Subject: can't compare

i'm thin, in shape, and pretty attractive. i used to kind of feel bad for fat women until my boyfriend cheated on me with an ugly, fat one. i think a normal thought when you've been cheated on would be to wonder if the peson they cheated on you with is better looking than you are. but, how do i compare to someone who is fat? i'll never be fat. don't feel bad for fat women. they're people just like us skinny women, except with bigger appetites, especially for other women's boyfriends.

Editor's Note: The other thing that people just don't get is that you can believe in the credo "live and let live" without being a lover of fatness. (JR)

November 28, 2005 at 19:28:36


Name: Curt
Subject: 50 things to do in someone else's house

Remove all labels from canned food.

"Tonight for dinner kids, we'll be having peaches, pork and beans and pumkin pie filling".

Editor's Note: That's a great one. Maybe I'll try it next time I'm in someone else's house. (JR)

November 24, 2005 at 09:30:18


Name: STEVE
Subject: BUDS GOOD

I CAN SEE HOW SOMEBODY WHO DRINKS SOMETHING OTHER THAN THE KING OF BEER {BUDWEISER} WOULD KNOW HOW PISS TASTE YOU FAG

Editor's Note: It's rare that I'm satisfied with a simple "no comment" as my response. This is one of those times. (JR)

November 13, 2005 at 21:31:37


Name: Jill
E-mail: liljill1@lycos.com
Subject: Boob jobs

I've had my boobs for 3 years and love them! I went from a B cup to a D cup and love the confidence it has given me. I've had 3 boyfriends and each seem to be very pleased with my assets. I know there's plenty of women who don't like the idea of being a "sex object", but it's fine with me. I just use it to my advantage. There's been times I know a room full of men have been erect because of my endowment but I take it as a compliment as long as they aren't vulgar. Shoot...they even got me out of a ticket...lol I just unzipped my top a little and the poor little policeman didn't know what to do. How fun is that...

Editor's Note: I think it's morally detestable to put an officer of the law in that kind of precarious position. Unless, of course, it got you out of a ticket. JR)

November 13, 2005 at 21:02:39


Name: anonymous
Subject: there are others too

visit google.com and type in "things to do at ___________" then a common store such as wal mart and target...they are hilarious!!!!!

Editor's Note: I give them credit for trying. (JR)

November 13, 2005 at 14:54:47


Name: Norah
E-mail: DuckyKissz@yahoo.com
Subject: LOVE IT!

I LOVE THIS LIST!!!!!!!!!!!!

Editor's Note: You must be a different race than me, otherwise, you'd be offended. (JR)

November 12, 2005 at 09:48:17


Name: anonymous
Subject: bible

that is mean, not everyone agrees with your stupid belifs

Editor's Note: True, some people belif the world is flat. (JR)

November 12, 2005 at 00:32:18


Name: jean
Subject: were is the humor

Do you really think this is funny to someone who is actually looking to try and kill themselves? They are looking for a way out and you're joking about it.

Editor's Note: As I'm sure you noticed, I added a link to the top of that page to a psychologist I recommend, in case anyone who's suicidal stumbles upon the page. However, if anyone does stumble upon that page, it's probably because they wanted to take a break from looking for ways to commit suicide and get a quick laugh first. (JR)

November 12, 2005 at 00:32:18


Name: jean
Subject: were is the humor

i waitress and dont find the humor in this.the public is not easy to wait on and we have a hard enough time dealing with people with out help

Editor's Note: Don't worry, that list was about waiters, not waitresses. There's nothing funny about playing jokes on waitresses. (JR)

November 11, 2005 at 22:45:24


Name: sd
Subject: gay

this is completely gay...where the hell are the graphics not keys?

Editor's Note: Please accept my apologies, frustrated porn gatherer. (JR)

November 9, 2005 at 20:34:43


Name: Babs
Subject: Re: Santa Claus

Geez, You sound like your pretty anal to me...Didn't have much of a childhood did you?...Brought up in an orphanage? Have no sense of adventure? No imagination? What a pitty...No happy childhood experience = really anal adult...Let me suggest that you seek out some therapy for your problem before it is too late...Life it too short to be so bitter....

Editor's Note: I could explain to you why the idea of being skeptical and pissed off about Santa Claus is funny, but I don't think you would believe me. (JR)

November 7, 2005 at 15:49:01


Name: Johan
Subject: none

Well with articles like this all i can say to the writer. Don't use my saviours name in vane (Jesus Christ the son of God) and that Jesus loves you. come to Him today and he will save you

Editor's Note: I went to Him yesterday. I got tired of talking to myself. (JR)

November 7, 2005 at 15:49:01


Name: Michael
Subject: Time Stand Still

I'm surprised you only just learned about the Rush/Aimee Mann connection. Anyway, Time Stand Still is a very nice song, but if you want to hear it I would recommend buying the Hold Your Fire album on which it originally appeared, rather than Chronicles which is just an overpriced collection as far as I'm concerned. HYF contains a bunch of great songs including Prime Mover and Mission, which I think you would enjoy. Mission is one of those songs which remind me that Neil Peart still holds a fairly Objectivist worldview despite his efforts to distance himself from the philosophy.

Alternatively, the Chronicles DVD has the hilarious (in my opinion) music video of the song, which features Aimee Mann in full 80s attire and has the band "floating" over various backgrounds (mostly nature scenes), through the use of a green screen.

Editor's Note: Thanks, I'll keep this in mind. I did shell out the money for Permanent Waves not too long ago, but it's tough to get past those vocals. (JR)

November 6, 2005 at 14:34:23


Name: Alexandra
E-mail: Shearas@hotmail.com
Subject: new words

Your really added some INTERESTING words... why thoses word i will not know. That was SO funny isthis a joke? LMAO

Editor's Note: Was it really your ass that you laughed off? (JR)

November 5, 2005 at 17:52:58


Name: not a leftist
Subject: being good-looking

You mention that not being good-looking makes it easier to weed out the superficial women. By superficial, I'm sure, you mean un-intellectual. But, actually, being good-looking enables you to meet women who are cultured and intelligent, but they're all money whores. If you make less than fifty grand a year, you only get to have meaningless sex with them until they find a guy with more money. So really being lower-middle class enables you to weed out the superficial women.

Editor's Note: I guess it depends on whether they prefer looks or money. If were going to be superficial, I'd take the woman with the looks. She can always make money. (JR)

November 4, 2005 at 11:56:25


Name: Murskit
E-mail: icebabbit@yahoo.com
Subject: excellent

Whoever made this is my hero.

Editor's Note: That would be me. I was sort of hoping that would be inferred from the positioning of my name near the title, but that's ok, I don't mind clarifying that. (JR)

November 3, 2005 at 17:59:25


Name: jen
E-mail: yeh_me23@hotmail.com
Subject: not funny

This list isnt very good lol, it should be in your top ten not funny list lol

Editor's Note: I admit, that's a pretty good jab. But no fixing typos this time. (JR)

November 1, 2005 at 00:54:16


Name: jen
E-mail: yeh_me23@hotmail.com
Subject: hilarious

these things were absolutely hilarious, me and my girls r gunna do some of em in a female public restroom LMAO thanx for the ideas

Editor's Note: If I like you, I may fix your typos. If I don't, I don't touch anything. (There, the secret is out.) But you only had one that counted, so there wasn't much for me to do, anyway. Remember, those things are for humor purposes only. So when you do them, do me proud. (Fortunately for me, there are sites like this.) (JR)

October 31, 2005 at 23:14:31


Name: CORY
Subject: about your list

Another thing you can do is pee in the same urinal as someone else that you do not know. I have done all 41 thing on the list and i have gotten kicked out off 3 Wal*Marts, 4 Krogers, and 4 County Markets..and a large amount of gas stations. lol Thank you for the wonderful ideas.

Editor's Note: I welcome photographic evidence of your exploits. (JR)

October 29, 2005 at 00:04:06


Name: anonymous
Subject: That Which Kills You Makes You Dead

i noticed that all of your heroes are not real

Editor's Note: Interesting observation, you're right. (Though I did like Dirk Benedict in both Battlestar Galactica and The A-Team.) In real life, I know people who are heroic in certain respects, but their flaws in other areas make me reluctant to categorize them as "heroes". It's a lot easier to find a hero in art because nonessential flaws can be completely omitted. But there are some people who come close to being heroes, or might be if I had the time to find out more about them. Larry David, Jerry Seinfeld, Denzel Washington, Thomas Sowell, and Walter Williams come to mind. Interesting, my "almost heroes" are all Jews and blacks. Ayn Rand will always be a hero, but although she's Jewish, she's dead. (JR)

October 27, 2005 at 15:51:17


Name: DUH
E-mail: ethomas@reachone.com
Subject: This was gay

These suggestions were lame-o, stupid-o, gay-o on the bayou. ARe you people so friggin' stupid that you can't come up with something better than this. You are dumber than a bunch of liberal, redneck, Arkansas, democrats.

Editor's Note: Fortunately, you weren't the one to decide whether to pay me for it. How do you like that for a surreptitious appeal to authority? (JR)

October 26, 2005 at 18:23:47


Name: emma
Subject: lets go round to jason's house

Thanks for those tips about what to do when i'm next round at your house! Given that i am a leftist collectivist idiot, i had no idea of the behavioural expectations required in an objectivists abode, now i can relax. Trade me some head for a fisting and call me a commie...

Editor's Note: Damn, you must have spent a long time reading my stuff, given your "fisting" comment which I assume is a reference to this and the probability that you also wrote the last two or more posts. If I had a nickel for every time someone who disagreed with me or who can't take a joke read a page on my website... (JR)

October 24, 2005 at 02:13:52


Name: mandy lou
Subject: ha!

Hey Jason,

picture this: you're a really lonely old man hanging for a blow job and my beautiful, lucious lipped toothless teenage daughter offers to give it a go. Whilst she is doing so, i ram a gun up your shitty objectivist,capitalist arse and you meet your untimely death. I then make off with everything that you own and worked hard to procure. And all i had to do was kill ya! How's that for a death threat? Did i win? huh? for you to hold the values that you do, it is obvious to me that you have had a really fucked up life and need to do everything in your power to supress the emotions caused by these events. I would really love to meet you so i could fuck with you some more. You don't have to feel sad about your small appendage. You know how they say 'it's not what you've got it's how you use it?' That is a big fat lie designed to make men like you feel better.

Editor's Note: Someone must have posted a link to that list on another feminist website. It's amusing how much time and energy feminists spend on flipping out about shit. Next time you're in the U.S., let me know (I note your use of the word "arse") and we'll have tea. (JR)

October 24, 2005 at 01:55:06


Name: myinsulinissilly
Subject: oh yeah

Those gummi bears would be quite useful for a type one diabetes sufferer, they could just save a life! How kind of you to think of us...

Editor's Note: Good point. I was going to say it might be better to send those Gummi Bears to a sugar allergy organization instead, but I just learned that sugar is not an allergen. Assuming these Brits know what they're talking about, "An allergen has to be a protein or a protein-binding hapten." (JR)

October 24, 2005 at 01:24:31


Name: jessi
Subject: we love looking at naked ladies

Yo Jason,
in response to your 'Send a complimentary Playboy subscription to the head office of the National Organization for Women' i just want to ask you how you logically came up with the conclusion that women are opposed to porn?

Editor's Note: Your error is assuming that the National Organization for Women is an organization for women. NOW is an organization for women who feel sexually inferior. NOW advocates things like a "Constitutional Equality Amendment" and "economic justice". When a leftist talks about "economic justice", they mean something other than getting paid what you and your employer mutually agree to; i.e., it ain't "justice". As for pornography, here's what's written about NOW in glbtq (An Encyclopedia of Gay, Lesbian, Bisexual, Transgender, and Queer Culture): "While NOW steadfastly supports individuals' rights to engage in consensual sex in private, the organization continues to distance itself from certain kinds of sexual activity, particularly pornography and sadomasochistic sex. Despite the fact that many women, both lesbian and heterosexual alike, enjoy these activities, NOW considers them to be inherently degrading to women." (JR)

October 24, 2005 at 01:22:35


Name: Jessi
Subject: c is for cunt

and i've got one that i like to use with a number of different people. after all, one must do what one can to keep the gene pool open. anyone wanna donate some money towards my tribe?

Editor's Note: If you're not being reimbursed sufficiently, you should take up a collection from the people who get to reap the benefits. It would be fine with me if you want to call it a bedroom toll or a cover charge. Whatever happens after entering the bedroom is up to the voluntary participants. Hey, if I were the cop on duty, I'd let you off. (JR)

October 23, 2005 at 21:35:28


Name: kyle
E-mail: shalfh@hotmail.com
Subject: your a dumb ass

Your retarded. "The Complete Book of Running" is the most influential books to modern running. That book started the "jogging craze" in the 70s. Ive read that book just because its a part of history. Also, when that book was published in 1977 it was the greatest selling non-fiction hardcover book EVER! To a runner this is a classic. You need to do a little research before you make your critisim because anyone who knows anything about running knows this book. P.S. they have porta pottys in marathons, so it wouldnt be that hard to take a shit.

Editor's Note: I'd like to say "no comment" and leave it at that. But I feel the need to mention that someone who ran a marathon told me that he saw evidence of runners declining the use of the bathrooms. (JR)

October 23, 2005 at 19:51:50


Name: Jackie Paper
E-mail: jacklver@yahoo.com
Subject: The Creation "debate"

Hello- Hey- you were saying "Bats ought to have sight". Uh- they DO. Bats can see- you mean you've never had a bat in your house and had to catch it? Or visited a bat up close at a zoo? Bats have perfectly good eyes! They just have their sonar, too- which is perfect for night hunting!

On another note- have you ever heard of the law of Entropy? Seems to me that Evolution would go against EVERY know law of physics.... without some outside influence- things do NOT go from chaos to order, but just the opposite.

Editor's Note: You and your bats are missing the sense of humor. You need eyes, ears, and a human brain have this sense. I do like your idea that "laws" can coexist with "outside influences". That's absolutely brilliant. I guess the laws of physics are like human laws. You're not supposed to speed, but you can. And things are not supposed to be organized, but God can organize them. God, then, is the cosmic pool shark, racking the billiard balls of the universe. (JR)

October 23, 2005 at 16:24:39


Name: sfdsfxs
Subject: zxczxd

you are a crack ass

Editor's Note: I like your "crack ass" formulation. Somehow, it seems worse, or at least more illustrative, to be an ass of the subset "crack ass", rather than a regular ass, which of course generally has a crack, anyway. Interesting, it's a little less graphic, plus it rolls off the tongue. I might just start using it myself. See, just like the retarded guy from All in the Family said, "Every man is my superior in that I may learn from him." (JR)

October 22, 2005 at 07:52:38


Name: nikki gigi
E-mail: nikkoy_982003@yahoo.com
Subject: about 50 fun things to do in someone else's house

the story you have placed is very rude...

Editor's Note: In my defense, I'd like to say that what you're commenting on is a list, not a story. The lack of characters and plot, and the 50 numbers next to each paragraph might have clued you in. Consider this your first ESL lesson. (JR)

October 22, 2005 at 02:10:12


Name: Dickinyurfuckingmouth
E-mail: suckmyballswontya@yahoo.com
Subject: pussycrybaby

u should go and fuck yur grandmothers asshole...and cheer up a bit more :)

Editor's Note: You must either be a big fan of ex-New Jersey governor James McGreevey, or you're an employee of the Department of Motor Vehicles (which is what I will continue to call it, even if McGreevey did change the name to MVC in order to curb the jokes). Please write back and let me know which one you are, so I can insult you properly. The e-mail address you entered doesn't seem to be working. (JR)

October 19, 2005 at 03:01:10


Name: Bill
E-mail: axelops@yahoo.com
Subject: Rev Disc

Ever watch an old NFL film? The white to black ratio is like 8-1. There were screams and screams of not enough blacks. Discrimination they said.

Ever watch an NFL game now? The ratio of black to white is like 8-1.

Where are the discriminatory cries now?

Editor's Note: White skin has a special property that shields its owner against discrimination. You can try, but you just can't discriminate against a white person. (JR)

October 18, 2005 at 18:41:46


Name: Platypus
Subject: Eat your words

"If you earn it, it's yours."

And if you don't, it's not. Where you go astray is in *assuming* that everyone who's rich is that way because they're brilliant and/or hard-working etc. when just as many are just better at being born to the right parents or exploiting others' brilliance and hard work. So yes, if you have several pots of unearned gold, reducing taxes on it is equivalent to giving you another.

See you again when (if) you make it to your junior year.

Editor's Note: It's another episode of "Sleazy Leftist Punk". Today's episode features: one ignorant and possibly just naïve statement; one sloppy and less-likely to be naïve statement; and one blatantly illogical and obviously sleazy statement. First, when someone inherits money, they inherit it because the person who earned it has the right to do with it as they choose. Second, you need to define "exploit", and see if you have the mental ability to differentiate a criminal's initiation of force from an employer trading salary for labor. Third, I suggest you sign up for a remedial math class. (JR)

October 17, 2005 at 20:12:34


Name: Matt
Subject: disappointed

Fission Mailed

Editor's Note: You're right, so I removed it. It was one of those things that got out of control. I kept working on it, just to finish it, then felt like I had to post it. What the hell, I'll post it here, just so people can have an intimate view of my trash can. (JR)

October 17, 2005 at 13:24:22


Name: dennis
E-mail: bdcadra@yahoo.com
Subject: jason roth's diatribe on women

why have you gone out of your way to directly and implicitly denigrate women who may be older than you and, consequently, in less athletic shape than you are (I'm assuming you are younger than 50 and actually I am guessing you are somewhere over 30-- perhaps a few years younger).

The women you described in such perjorative terms will someday give you the greatest, wildest, and most ecstatic moments of your life.

While you seem to view this part of your world view, it seems to me that a person of your age has not had the experience to make any such conclusions or remarks.

Let me make this remark before I sign off: try to keep a mental recollection of all the young babes you score with.

Just like EVERONE in the western world, you will discover that the women with the curves you seem to dislike have the ability to take you to places no young bimbos have the ability,experience, or expertise to even visualise, much less transport you to such regions you have yet to realize exist. (The bony broads you seem Tobe speaking of are actually human examples of the younger female.

There is no denying that such female, in the proper age group, is a stupifying, traffic -stopping, eye-catching young woman who exhibits physical and nubile traits which cannot be competed with. However, the very women you seem to be criticizing because of their age and the condition of their bodies, after a certain length of life, which includes the having of children, I am going to guess that you are a young man and have never been confronted with the REALITY of the moment when you might have sex with a woman many [stet]

Editor's Note: Perhaps you were going to write "...times your size"? I'm sorry you cut your post off and I didn't have the pleasure of learning your complete thoughts. But congratulations for yet another self-evasive comment on this article. It seems that the issue people are most passionate about is defending fat people. I like the way you first insult all non-fat women by saying, "you will discover that the women with the curves you seem to dislike have the ability to take you to places no young bimbos have the ability, experience, or expertise to even visualise". Thanks for making my point perfectly clear: that people who defend fat people - for being fat - have a hatred for those who conduct their lives such that they don't get fat. Your justification of the irrational, whether you're fat yourself or not, is a justification of your own irrationality. Just try not to be so obvious about it. (JR)

October 17, 2005 at 07:02:28


Name: Dr. Joe Pap
E-mail: ColdFusion@compuserve.com
Subject: Google

Hey, like the comments on Google.

Getting more and more disfranchised by the day with those you-know what suckers...

Type in FUCK GOOGLE and I'm Feeling Lucky for a laugh!

Just like the fact that Bill Gates is the antichrist, and a few people have figured it out..Google is Lucifer incarnate.

Whoops, I just noticed my hands are on FIRE...

Joe

Editor's Note: Lucifer is the antichrist, by the way. Get your religious facts straight. (Pardon the oxymoron.) (JR)

October 12, 2005 at 21:35:44


Name: Alex
E-mail: alexmbrae@hotmail.com
Subject: Balls-O-Meter

Excellence is an art won by training and habituation. We do not act rightly because we have virtue or excellence, but rather we have those because we have acted rightly. We are what we repeatedly do. Excellence, then, is not an act but a habit.
-Aristotle

Editor's Note: Great quote. Unfortunately, I don't yet qualify for "excellence" with just a B average. (JR)

October 11, 2005 at 10:50:57


Name: Freddy
Subject: more ways [to make your suicide look like homicide]

You could always slice your wrist open while placing them in a toilet and flushing. It drains the blood out quicker and causing death to happen at a faster rate.

Editor's Note: And if you go outside in the winter with your hair wet, you'll catch a cold. It sounds like an old (suicidal) wives' tale, but I can't say that I've tested it. (JR)

October 6, 2005 at 21:57:25


Name: Scott
E-mail: SDMUNNER@AOL.COM
Subject: New One

Change all the lotion bottles out with mayo.

Editor's Note: I hope that English is your second language, but for some reason I doubt it. And shouldn't it be "change the bottles in with mayo"? (JR)

October 5, 2005 at 16:25:42


Name: casey
Subject: peeing

If someone is drinking lemonade in a cup poor it out and pee in it.

Editor's Note: But only with their full permission. (JR)

October 4, 2005 at 17:05:37


Name: Don
E-mail: DEEDIG7@aol.com
Subject: To The Editor

I don't know how I ended up on this site. I was looking for a Catholic site and somehow was directed here. All I can say is, HE WILL TURN YOU. Maybe not now, maybe not 20 years from now, maybe not even on your death bed, but you will know the Lord. I'm not surprised by this site... you people are the same. Very intelligent, on the outside-seemingly so sure of yourself ,but at some point in your life, someone or something made you question the values of Christianity. On the inside, you're really just a scared, lonely individual looking for the truth. You probably don't have any children, or none that your close to, the same situation for any parents or siblings, or even a partner for that matter. Anyone who screams for this much attention, is looking for answers for the real truth. The truth about The Lord Jesus Christ. I don't know you my Editor friend, but I'll pray for you and for all of the people out there who stuggle like you do. God Bless you and good luck.

Donnie

Editor's Note: Maybe you were directed here because you were searching on Google for "dead grandparents pussies cookies", hoping to find the relevant Bible passage. Somehow, though, you found a page on my site instead. (I do like the fact that I compete with Christ for page views.) Of course, this being the Internet, there are other people besides me who use those words in close proximity, so it's merely a coincidence that you got to my site rather than the one with the graphic photos of the above terms. However, to address your comment: I have said before, and will continue to say, that the day I questioned the existence of God is one of my proudest moments. Another, previous moment, was the day I decided to follow wherever Ayn Rand's philosophy would take me, in the sense of questioning anything and everything I had ever accepted, and to challenge all ideas, however widely accepted they were. It was this decision, incidentally, that eventually made the other moment possible. (JR)

October 4, 2005 at 13:43:55


Name: Alex
E-mail: alexmbrae@hotmail.com
Subject: 1 more thing

1 more thing I like to do in other people's homes: Replace the shampoo and/or conditioner with Nair, a chemical hair remover.

Editor's Note: If you replace their shampoo with Nair, I think it's only fair that you replace their Nair with Rogaine. (JR)

October 4, 2005 at 13:38:06


Name: courtney
E-mail: courtney_618@yahoo.com
Subject: you're so great

I was so happy to find out that there are other people who feel the way I do about voting. I am almost 22 years old and have yet to register to vote. But I don't not vote because I am too lazy to go or because I don't know a damn thing about the candidates, I do so because the candidates really suck ass most of the time. If there was ever a candidate that I felt really wanted the responsibilities that come with the position then I definitely would. I also second the fact that there should be a choice of abstained in the booths. The candidates need to see just how many people think they both wasted their time running.

Editor's Note: Well, it doesn't hurt to register to vote. Just in case the opportunity comes up, you want to be fully prepared to miss it. (JR)

October 3, 2005 at 20:08:35


Name: gnargtharst
E-mail: gnargtharst@earthlink.net
Subject: a day early

"Fucking with them a day early"...

What's June 1st?

Editor's Note: Thank you for pointing out either my bad math or my bad knowledge of holidays. I deleted the sentence you referred to, in which I implied that the day after May 31 was April Fool's Day. Obviously, I'm confusing May with Groundhog's Month. (JR)

October 3, 2005 at 11:24:34


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

                


 
© Copyright 1999-2005. All posts made to this forum become property of Jason Roth.
Feedback to: feedback@savethehumans.com