What’s going on? 7/10/2008
July 10th, 2008 | by Steve O |President George W Bush called the Prime Minister of Italy “amigo.” Memin Pinguin could not be reached for comment because Wal-Mart removed him from their stores.
Public Service Announcement: It’s now illegal to have sex with a corpse in Wisconsin. It was a 5-2 ruling, what on Earth were the dissenting judges thinking?
Total Fail: You must know how to speak English before you decide to call for a non-English speaking country to speak English. Penis.
Next up, John McCain in heels. It appears that the taller candidate has won the popular vote 65 percent of the time. Not to fear, who needs the popular vote when you have the Supreme Court to decide elections?
Really touching video of the first Habitat for Humanity homeowners in San Francisco. The father in this video was stabbed to death in April.
Catholic Priest holds a funeral for the aborted. In other religious news, a secret Catholic priest boot camp was discovered in Florida.
We now learn what Cheney’s Energy Task Force was really up to.
Cricket, just one more thing our president sucks at.
McCainiac: The double talk express has left the station.
Equal opportunities gone wild. “It’s just common sense that you would not employ an air traffic controller who is blind or partially sighted,”
24 Responses to “What’s going on? 7/10/2008”
By Lazarus Long on Jul 10, 2008 | Reply
Steve-O;
To be fair, everyone sucks at Cricket
By steve on Jul 10, 2008 | Reply
Dude… What was the habitat for humanity guy doing hanging with a 22 year old chick from East Palo Alto anyway? (crack ho) They built them a house in a pretty rough neighborhood too. Go look up 1451 Van Dyke St. in San Francisco on Google street view….
Italy is Europe’s Mexico…
By steve on Jul 10, 2008 | Reply
Oh and the catholic priest boot camp is in pretty poor taste, even for an insensitive atheist, liberal who gets pissed every time an abortion is stopped, a gun is sold or a gay couple is denied a marriage license.
By steve on Jul 10, 2008 | Reply
Fucking Eisenhower… keeping 150,000 plus troops in Europe, Korea and Japan indefinitely…
By Steve O on Jul 10, 2008 | Reply
Steve, there is nothing insensitive about poking fun and priests that rape and molest kids. And the fact that it is allowed to happen by pretty much ignoring it is pretty disgusting.
And thanks for pointing out that we are in fact hegemons.
By steve on Jul 10, 2008 | Reply
“there is nothing insensitive about poking fun and priests that rape and molest kids. ”
Yeah, well… what about the kids? I am sure a molested kid thinks it’s funny to poke fun at.
“
By Craig R. Harmon on Jul 10, 2008 | Reply
Guy walks into an employment office wearing dark sunglasses and tapping a red cane in front of him. He says, “Uh, yeh, I’d like to apply for the chauffeur’s job or maybe the position of gun marksmanship trainer.”
The clerk behind the desk says, “Sure. Need the applications in Braille?”
Sheesh!
By Craig R. Harmon on Jul 10, 2008 | Reply
Technically, the ‘Total Fail’ guy’s problem wasn’t an inability to speak English (although he may have problems speaking English) but a homophone-word-selection error of writing. Embarrassing, I know but, also technically, there’s no “you must never use improper grammar” clause in the first amendment.
By Steve O on Jul 10, 2008 | Reply
Craig, chances are, if he spelled it that way he speaks that way. What ever happen to Phonics class? Did they stop teaching that in the No Child Left Behind Program?
And Steve, I’m not poking fun at the kid, lighten up Francis!
By Craig R. Harmon on Jul 10, 2008 | Reply
Steve O,
I disagree. Surely, with all the words you’ve ever typed or written, you’ve made grammatical errors. Certainly I have. I assume you speak English just fine and I assure you that I speak English very well. But being only semi-literate (let’s say for the sake of argument, this guy is) doesn’t translate to an inability to speak the language just fine. After all, there are plenty of people who can neither read nor write that can speak their language so I really don’t think there’s a necessary connection between the ability to write grammatically perfect sentences and the ability to speak one’s native tongue properly at a basic level.
But there’s still no “perfect grammar required” clause in the first amendment.
By Craig R. Harmon on Jul 10, 2008 | Reply
As for the sex with a corpse thing, hey, who are you to judge. Lawrence v. Texas said states couldn’t outlaw sexual activities based upon the perceived “ick factor” of those activities. Necrophelia is, after all, just another lifestyle choice. I doubt the corpse said, “No!”
Seriously, though. I read a court ruling that said, if I remember correctly, a man cannot be arrested for having sexual intercourse with a dead animal. I would guess the minority were thinking along the same lines. Icky, to be sure, but, honestly, when you deny the government the ability to legislate morals, you get judges who take that the next step and the next step again until they’ve not only slid down the slippery slope, they’ve lept off the cliff at the end of the slope.
By Steve O on Jul 10, 2008 | Reply
Craig, but, I can’t help but think there are some health risks involved, no?
And true, I doubt she said no but on the other hand she probably never constented either, right?
By Craig R. Harmon on Jul 10, 2008 | Reply
By what right, after all, do governments presume to make polygamy illegal? Governments can no longer constitutionally define marriage as between one man and one woman without courts throwing such laws out. Kennedy says the Constitution allows Americans to define their own personal reality. This guy wants to marry that guy. This guy wants to marry those women. That guy wants to cohabit with that corpse. Once you’ve taken away the ability of governments to legislate such matters by undermining the only logical basis for doing so, you wind up with a well iced slope and it’s too late to not go down it.
By Craig R. Harmon on Jul 10, 2008 | Reply
Steve O,
In this day and age, there are health risks to pretty much all sex. Maybe the guy was sensitive and used a rubber.
Yeh. I’m writing tongue in cheek but, truly, there’s truth in my immediately preceding comment, I think.
By steve on Jul 10, 2008 | Reply
She didn’t give consent… she was asking for it!! Laying there all sexy and dead…
By Steve O on Jul 10, 2008 | Reply
Steve is a no means yes type of guy.
By Paul Watson on Jul 10, 2008 | Reply
Craig,
That’s true, she didn’t say yes. And under UK law, that would be rape, as there’s no assumed consent anymore. You now have to fill in a form to confirm you both consent to have sex.*
*=Only one of those two is true, by the way, before someone goes mental on me.
By Paul Merda on Jul 10, 2008 | Reply
LOL!!!! Oh my god, who would have thought we have a thread this long, and funny about necrophilia…egad!
steve, yours was especially funny…for some reason it really cracked me up…
By Craig R. Harmon on Jul 10, 2008 | Reply
Paul W.,
Understand that that comment was strictly tongue in cheek. I understand that the failure to say no in a situation where a person is not free to say no or to give consent fails as a standard of judging a matter. But there is the question of, well, this is a corpse. Being a corpse, legally, there was no one there to be raped. May as well be a watermellon with a hole cut in it, right? There’s just as much humanity in a watermellon as in a corpse. Or that was the argument I heard over and over about Terry Shiavo. They weren’t killing Terry because Terry wasn’t there anymore. She was long gone. What was left was merely a shell. In this case there was no one there to either give consent or to say no. There was no one there to be humiliated, to feel pain, either physical or mental. There was no one there to have flash-backs about the awful experience because no one but the guy experienced anything either pleasurable or ghastly.
Really all we’re talking about is society being aghast at such behavior but then we get back to regulating morality based upon society’s sense of the ‘ick factor’. We forbid rape because it seriously harms a human being. A corpse is not a human being; it’s a dead body. Both the person who used to inhabit that body and the body are beyond caring what happens to the body…particularly if one is an atheist with no sense of a continuation of consciousness beyond death.
Okay, our conversation is going seriously into the disturbing (largely because I’ve taken it here) but I always liked being the devil’s advocate — [everyone here does know that I'm not advocating that we make necrophilia legal, right?] What I’m doing now is asking us to examine society’s taboos as they remain enshrined in our laws.
By Craig R. Harmon on Jul 10, 2008 | Reply
Paul M.,
With me around, no topic is beyond discussion. I’m a contrary sort. If I run across an issue where essentially everyone’s agreed pretty much, I throw the proverbial monkey-wrench into the works and ask sometimes disturbing questions or defend disturbing points of view — just ask Paul Watson about our discussions about torture.
By Craig R. Harmon on Jul 11, 2008 | Reply
Well, judging by the silence I guess I made it too disturbing to continue. Oh well…
By Craig R. Harmon on Jul 11, 2008 | Reply
It was the watermellon thing, I suppose.
By emmet on Jul 12, 2008 | Reply
Craig, I’m just reading this today 7/12/08 and I haven’t been to this site in a long time. But what time did you post:
“Well, judging by the silence I guess I made it too disturbing to continue. Oh well…”
Because that was the night SteveO was hit and it is kind of erie because I’m sure he would have replied.
I’m going to reply for my brother SteveO by saying, “WTF, thank God I’m not dead and being F—ed by a living person”
By Craig R. Harmon on Jul 13, 2008 | Reply
Steve O was hit? By what? Is he alright?