You are currently browsing the category archive for the ‘Yahoo’ category.
It’s from a video spoof called Sheik Fil A….. Delaware Liberal introduced to us a week and a half ago.
A lot of people, especially men have trouble dealing with anal penetration of the buttocks, especially when that anus belongs to another man.
For that reason, their squeamishness causes them to be against da gays. Those most adamant against this act usually come from areas where if that act is done, it is not done in love, but is instead used as a brutal weapon. Bluntly put, it is used in rural America, Arab nations, and areas of the inner city, as rape, … a crime of violence and not mutual respect.
Therefore those from areas where this constantly occurs ( a more violent version of Mitt Romney pinning a boy down and cutting his hair,) tend to be consistently against that act. Ironically, most often none tend to see anything wrong when that practice occurs between heterosexual couples. It is safe. It is harmless. It is exploratory, and it is consensual. Most often, those who are violently against da gays, see nothing wrong with two old ladies living together. They never venture to wonder what goes on in that old house. But they have no problem with them being roomies. Likewise they see old men living together as acceptable. They are old. Surely nothing goes on inside that old house…
Because of the horrible trauma that they have endured, they fail to see that marriage equality is about love… nothing more. People don’t stay together for years just to get off. They stay because that person is who they want to spend their time with. Every day they face a question? Do I want to go to a club and hook up, or do I want to go home to my best friend, and every day they choose to go home to their best friend.
To be fair the same choice exists for hetero-sexual couples. Should I take this easy lay being offered at work, or should I go home to my life-partner… It appears now that 50% of us choose to go home to our spouses. The other 50% take the easy lay. Based on divorce figures that is…
The more you look at it, the more two gays in a relationship appear better if not as good, as a man and a wife in a relationship. It certainly isn’t about sex in a hetero sexual marriage. Those of you who have been married forty years…. how often do you have sex now? How about thirty? Twenty? Sadly there are an awful lot of people out there not having sex these days… despite the invention of viagra…
So why is it “only” about sex in a single sex couple? It isn’t. It is about finding someone you love, and choosing to last long enough together to see what that love will grow…..
So if you are against single sex marriage, you are against love. And in the words of our Lord and Saviour, being against love, is not where you want your heart to be when you pass over to the other side…
So what do you do about Chik Fil A appreciation day. Their chicken is soooo good, like butter… butter it is.. It is the only thing worth waiting for in a Drive Thru line… So how does one balance ones innate desire to support something soo good you can’t do without, versus someone else’s problem with someone expressing their freedom of speech…..
What if instead of gays, Chik Fil A was busting on Christians?.. What if they were busting on Muslims? What if they were busting on Catholics? What if they were busting on Jews? What if they were busting on wet backs? What if they were busting on Spics? What if they were busting on Pollacks? What if they were busting on Talley’s? What if they were busting on Indians? What if they were busting on Mexicans? What if instead of gays, we were in the deep south of the 60’s, and they were busting on blacks, saying blacks shouldn’t get married; saying blacks can’t vote; saying blacks can’t go to restrooms with whites; saying blacks have to sit on the back of the bus; saying blacks can’t sit at the part of the counter that plainly says…. “white’s only”? Would you be one of those southerners laughing it off as something them northern city-fied liberals were instigating, and damn it, someone with southern pride was gonna buy every piece of chicken that Chik Fil A put down in the grease?
If so… I hope you choke on your chicken……..
Right click to open full image… Pictograph Courtesy of Viral..
So, can someone tell me again, why we shouldn’t tax the rich, and instead, balance the budget on the backs of everyone else?…….
I seem to be missing that little detail where that all makes sense……
There are the two extremes.
One, a person who makes an invention, should be able to make money off his idea, and not have it stolen out from under him, by someone else…
Two, we have a right to our own thoughts and since all thoughts are incorporations of other people’s thoughts, for free speech to occur, we cannot hold everyone liable for everything borrowed they say….
Where do we draw the line?
“The Congress shall have power…To promote the progress of science and useful arts, by securing for limited times to authors and inventors the exclusive right to their respective writings and discoveries;”
Limited time.
So if I was talking to Nancy, and said, hey did you hear the new Radiohead Song about Christine O’Donnell and she said no, and I sang it to her (rather well I might add), then I would have violated the Constitution by violating the exclusive right of Radiohead to be the first one to let Nancy in on that song….
But, if pursued, I would be safe under the Free Speech clause of the Constitution…
So if I was talking to Liberal Geek, and had these great Pink Floyd lyrics that just fit a current event and repeated them to him, I would be violating the Constitution by not allowing Pink Floyd the exclusive right to be the first to let him on that correlation.
But, if pursued, I would be safe under the Free Speech clause of the Constitution.
And so, if using the Internet, I were to take a YouTube clip of a campaigner, say sucking on a corndog, and say this is what campaigning has boiled down to, why aren’t we discussing issues anymore”.. I would be violating the Constitution by not allowing that person, whomever it might be, the right to be the first to make that correlation….
Bit if pursued. I would be protected under my first amendment rights…. My right to free speech…
Now, lets say, I did post a corndog picture. or one of Obama smoking a cigarette, or one of Obama with a hole in his head… and got arrested….
I would say I was protected under the Freedom of Speech clause of the Constitution. Right?
No, not if the SOPA bill currently supported by Chris Coons, John Carney, or Tom Carper, gets voted on and passed…
Also, 99% of YouTubes videos will be yanked, if this bill becomes law.
Also, 99% of Googles information, will be pulled, or hidden, if this bill becomes law.
Also 99% of Yahoo’s and the other search engines, will have to scrub a majority of their files… if this bill becomes law…
This is a dumb law.. Really, really, really dumb…
Just like the last dumb law pushed by the entertainment lobby. To make VCR’s illegal.
“We are going to bleed and bleed and hemorrhage, unless this Congress at least protects one industry that is able to retrieve a surplus balance of trade and whose total future depends on its protection from the savagery and the ravages of this machine. … I say to you that the VCR is to the American film producer and the American public as the Boston strangler is to the woman home alone.”
Jack Valenti before Congress April 12 1982.
The VCR business made millions for the entertainment industry.
I just used that without their permission.
I could be shut down, and so, could Wikipedia…
Without which, what’s the point of having internet?
Correct me if I’m wrong. But today, I speak more on the internet than I do with real people. How about you? True or False?
We the people have the right, based on precedence and common sense, to have our own thoughts without having to worry about them being monitored, stored, and used against us at a later date.
It needs to be clear. The Internet is free. Copying a song and sending it, is the exact same thing as humming a tune to another person. Under no circumstances is if allowable for a government to shut down a site, that is involved with the dissemination of information. Information is not open for discussion. It is everything on the internet.
This bill is too loose and like the Patriot Act, too invasive. The entertainment industry already makes billions. None of that, or only a tiny fraction, goes to the personnel who created the object.
The fact that we should all never again speak freely, should always temper what we say, so they can make another $10,000… is absolutely obscene…
You need to let them know.
Since Google follows me, this story is obselete by now, but if you hurry, you may see for yourself…
I spent an hour roaming through Google looking for a story I heard today on WDEL… It was impossible to find.
That story is the one featured below, describing the savings the Obamacare had given to Seniors: over $1 Billion, or spread over 2 million benefactors, and average of $550 each…
$550 each.
You would think that would be some news, right? At least lead the Google stream? But even surfing with tags like, “Senior’s save $550” or “Medicare saves $1 billion” or, “Obamacare saves money in prescriptions” only pulled up Romney’s promise to abolish Obamacare, or Cain’s and Perry’s numbers their pulling Obamacare would save Corporate America.
I wasted over an hour.
Then, I got the bright idea to switch to Yahoo. Within one second, I had all the stories I needed.. I didn’t even change the type. Went from 0 to full…
What’s up, Google?
kavips 