We the People for 225 years

Our Constitution was signed on September 17, 1787. Today is Constitution Day in the United States, or more precisely, Constitution Day and Citizenship Day.

The law establishing the holiday was created in 2004 with the passage of an amendment by Senator Robert Byrd to the Omnibus spending bill of 2004. Before this law was enacted, the holiday was known as “Citizenship Day.” In addition to renaming the holiday “Constitution Day and Citizenship Day,” the act mandates that all publicly funded educational institutions provide educational programming on the history of the American Constitution on that day. In May 2005, the United States Department of Education announced the enactment of this law and that it would apply to any school receiving federal funds of any kind. This holiday is not observed by granting time off work for federal employees.

Celebrate in style and read the whole thing.

187 Responses

  1. Segue from the conversation downstairs…
    Ultimatum to US: ‘Criminalise blasphemy or lose consulate’

  2. Damn, all my good comments are in the other thread.

  3. I am certain there’s more in you on this topic!

  4. Don’t you dare blaspheme the Flying Spaghetti Monster. Hell to pay, scuse the pun.

  5. Celebrate Constitution Day by exercising your rights!

  6. I’m thinking of all that wincingly horrid Jesus ‘art’ we’ve seen in the past years. But that’s not blasphemy or anything. Funny how nobody killed a bunch of innocent people over it though. We must be not civilized.

  7. But then which state was it that tried to pass a bill making it ‘Justifiable Homicide’ to kill an abortion doctor and his patient? We’re getting there.

  8. Yeah here it is. More than one state
    south dakota
    http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/south-dakota-defending-justifiable-homicide-bill-include-abortion/story?id=12923085

    nebraska
    http://www.motherjones.com/politics/2011/02/nebraska-justifiable-homicide-abortion-bill

    also Iowa. did i miss any/

  9. So this is where the party is.

  10. Just working trimming pots. Pots that would be perfect for bacon grease.

  11. That would qualify as torture, DE, you blasphemous SOB.

  12. Well all of this at least helps to explain why protection gun sales are up in the USA.

  13. Speaking of a gun and a dog, I really should take a shot of the fur I pulled off my molting dog last night.

  14. This young Pak girl is mentally challenged and was arrested in August on blasphemy charges. She was finally released on bail, but her life is still in danger.
    http://india.nydailynews.com/newsarticle/5053778bc110c00945000000/change-of-pakistan-s-blasphemy-laws-unlikely

  15. This is the slippery slope: http://www.forbes.com/sites/abigailesman/2011/12/30/could-you-be-a-criminal-us-supports-un-anti-free-speech-measure/

    Only Obama could give us this b.s. — through the backdoor too! Is it any wonder the savages think their demands that the US “protect Islam against insults” can succeed?

    God knows when I hear smart people analogize the ridiculously hamfisted anti-Mohd. movie trailer to “crying fire in a crowded theater,” I have to shake my head in disbelief at how far into the danger zone we’ve already slipped. Offending/injuring another’s feelings or sensibilities — religious or otherwise — can NEVER fall within that intentionally narrow and well-defined exception to our free speech rights. Please read up on it — it’s not a matter of colloquial definitions. It is not a relative — ‘what’s pissing people off these days’ — standard. Defend your rights — even in uncomfortable situations — or lose them.

  16. How is that a slippery slope? It doesn’t give anything more than our Constitution already gives.

    I already admitted elsewhere that I wasn’t smart enough to figure out what was right in the case of third rate “art” whose sole purpose was to incite.

  17. I’ve seen some horrific anti Jew and anti christian crap go on in this country and never once did anyone even consider making it illegal. This is only about ONE religion and that’s bullshit. The video was practically laughable it was so bad, but no worse than some of the upside down Jesus art I’ve seen come out of galleries. This is clearly meant to appease one barbaric culture that kills at the drop of a hat and looks for any excuse because it’s sport. This is not about insults at all and only the UN would pander to this shit, since it is dominated by the worst human rights violators on earth since the big bang. This is getting too obvious for words. Next thing you know all the disgruntled Times Square crackpots in the USA will be demanding we kill people before they are offended.

    As for crying Fire in a theater. Oh bullshit. If it wasn’t this reason to kill they would find another one.

    This is like placating asylum inmates FCS.

  18. Regarding that call to criminalize blasphemy, this would be a good time for those moderate, peaceful Muslims to step up and make their voices heard.

  19. imust wasn’t the the girl who they had to release because they discovered some cleric planted some burnt pagees on her so she would be arrested for blasphemy?

  20. Everyone in Hollywont would be going to prison. I hear God damn and Jesus Christ! on lots of shows.

  21. NES didn’t they kill a leader in Pak for declaring blasphemy laws should be removed?

  22. Sophie, I beleve, I really believe, most of the Muslim community lives in FEAR of speaking out.

  23. Yes that video is “bad” but a video on how to properly beat your wife is a ok.

  24. Yes Uppity, that’s the girl. She wasn’t completely released, but the let her out on bail based on evidence that the cleric had planted the evidence. She and her family are in hiding. (She is mentally challenged btw).

  25. The cleric should be executed immediately for blasphemy then. When pigs fly.

    She has Downs syndrome. How awful these people are. Simply awful.

  26. @Sophie, yes, what are there, like over a billion Muslims in the world? Since these radicals only represent a small minority, it seems the peaceful ones clearly outnumber them, why not speak up?

  27. They most likely consider her disability some kind of punishment from God anyway, so I doubt they’d be sympathetic.

  28. exactly DE. If anything is offensive it’s their treatment of women and girls. I’m offended! Arrest them! How about when they behead people on video and broadcast it. This is NOT inciteful? This is NOT offensive to the families? This double standard is bullshit. That video is nothing compared to the atrocities these savages commit on a daily basis for sport.

  29. The video of them cutting off Daniel Pearle’s head, why that was just fine.

  30. Yeah imust, mentally challenged and a girl besides. Nothing but rape fodder for them.

  31. We treat our dogs better than they treat humans.

  32. INCIDENTALLY AND FYI, the UN gasbags are in their monthly CLOSED SESSION today. What do you think they are talking about Frankly, I am surprised Europe hasn’t weighed in on the bullcrap yet. Especially Merkle. We’re talking about the most fundamental right ever, right here, right now.

  33. Yes, Upps, he wasn’t just a leader — only the governor of the largest province.

  34. Imust, fundegelicals right here at home consider disabilities punishments from God:
    http://thinkprogress.org/politics/2010/02/22/83337/disabled-abortion/

  35. Yes that’s right, I remember now, NES.

    Fundgelicals, Sophie, are no better, it’s just they are restricted by USAs laws against killing people. I really believe that.

  36. International law my ass. We’re going to compromise with “best practices” of barbaric countries who haven’t evolved in centuries?

  37. The UN thing is non-binding, by the way.

  38. Hell I’ve got links to sites that discuss how women should dress with victorian paintings for examples, and commenters discussing how they ADMIRE muslim women for covering up. We’ve got more worries than one in this country. Fundies are upset because the Muslim theocrats are getting in the way of their theocrats.

  39. The issue in the resolution is the “incitement” of violence. Like Uppity says, the radicals need no excuse. They are incited by our mere existence.

  40. @Sophie, notice how the fundegelicals always quote the Old Testament when justifying their horrendous claims?
    Fundegelicals and Radical Islamists seem to be living in the same century.

  41. imust, I still have the same Idunno as last night. Yes, I think they are way too sensitive (read: trigger-happy) and I am not for appeasing their medieval religion (or anyone else’s for that matter). I am thinking about our own arguments here in the US regarding hate speech, hate groups, bullying, and so on.

  42. Frankly, I am both shocked and amused that the kossacks are siding with the clerics in this case. In their countries the kossacks would be the first ones carted off.

  43. imust, Yes I do!! That has been one of my pet peeves for a couple of decades! Don’t Christians read the NEW Testament any more?

  44. Christians, love them the OT Sophie, because it gives them excuses for their own bad behavior. They pretend they are Job or David, who was a murderer, an adulterer and an all around piece of shit who had his mistress’ husband killed and treated his kids like dog crap……but “God loved him”.

  45. But isn’t hate speech tied to a hate crime? That is, speech itself isn’t the crime, it’s when the crime is committed and there’s evidence of hate speech? Wasn’t that all the buzz with the Zimmerman/Martin case? They had a recording they claimed Zimmerman muttered the n word? They were trying to pin, hate crime on him as well.

  46. the radicals need no excuse. They are incited by our mere existence.

    We have a winner. This entire thing is one more sleazy attempt to move us all into Forced Islam using their rules.

    Homosexuality is blasphemy to them too. And my tank top and shorts I’m wearing right now is blasphemy to them. You can see where these creatures are headed with this crap.

  47. And the other thing that all the fundamentalist zealots of all religions have in common is expecting people who aren’t even members of their organizations to follow their rules when they don’t.

  48. imust, I don’t know. For example, this wikipedia article about hate speech says:

    In the United States, hate speech is protected as a civil right (aside from usual exceptions to free speech, such as defamation, incitement to riot, and fighting words).[55] Laws prohibiting hate speech are unconstitutional in the United States; the United States federal government and state governments are forbidden by the First Amendment of the Constitution from restricting speech.[56][57][58][59]

    The “reason why fighting words are categorically excluded from the protection of the First Amendment is not that their content communicates any particular idea, but that their content embodies a particularly intolerable (and socially unnecessary) mode of expressing whatever idea the speaker wishes to convey.”[60] Even in cases where speech encourages illegal violence, instances of incitement qualify as criminal only if the threat of violence is imminent.[61] This strict standard prevents prosecution of many cases of incitement, including prosecution of those advocating violent opposition to the government and those exhorting violence against racial, ethnic, or gender minorities.[62]

    Lawyer–care to help me out here?

  49. Exactly. I want no part of their religious woman hobbling dogma. And the country I live in says I don’t have to be part of it.

    All of this is why I loved split congresses. If the Democrats had both houses we would be looking as some comvoluted law about what you can and can’t say. If the Repubicans had both houses, we would be looking at complete control of woman’s lives and behaviors. Watching these assholes neutralize each other regardless of who is president is the very best we can hope for. Then maybe a normal person will land on the Supreme Court for a change. Has to be split by more than a few though, if you recall that POS cheney got to vote to break a tie in the senate.

  50. If only a split congress offered protection! They figure out a way to slip stuff in. They horse-trade stuff with each other. And none of that crap is ever beneficial or solves any real problems people are having.

  51. NES where are you? Read that!

  52. From the “Criminalize Blasphemy” article:

    One of the participants of the rally, Abdullah Ismail, passed away after he was taken to Mayo Hospital. Witnesses said he had complained of feeling unwell from the smoke from US flags burnt at the rally.

    Ironic, eh?

  53. I think that again, fighting words or any hate speech has to have a direct link to a violent act and particular person to be considered a crime in this country. I don’t think it can be vague toward an entire religion or race, but must be directed AT a person of that race or religion in order to incite violence or inflict pain. JMO.

  54. Nope. No irony there at all.

  55. Is it a coincidence that we outsource our flag-making to China, where they use materials and dyes that are regulated here in the USA?

  56. The UN thing is non-binding, by the way.

    It had better be.

    Normally, anything labeled a ‘resolution’ in any government level is not binding. It’s just a bunch of horn tooting. But threatening the USA to make it illegal or else is, talk about “Red Line” is WAY over the Red Line.

  57. LOL china. He probably inhaled some melamine. Or arsenic. They love them their melamine and arsenic.

  58. If our “leaders” even think about criminalizing blasphemy, I expect there will be rioting in the streets in America and the participants would be from BOTH the left and the right. Way to bring us together!

  59. In reading that quote, I am reminded of how amusing it is that women are lumped in with ‘minorities,’ considering they are America’s majority. Just goes to show you how smarmy the patriarchy really is.

  60. If you please, everyone, Required Reading today:
    http://www.thedailybeast.com/newsweek/2012/09/16/ayaan-hirsi-ali-on-the-islamists-final-stand.html
    Ayaan Hirsi Ali. author of “Infidel”, on the dangers of apoligizing to Islam for free speech, and her own horrific experience.

  61. Ways that your cat can tell you that you’re spending too much time on the internet

    http://theoatmeal.com/comics/cat_vs_internet

    Cat vs. Internet

    Hugz!!! Enjoy!!!

  62. ROFL Daki. I have one behind me on the back of the chair. He saw this. I better get moving!

  63. Woman’s progress in the land of Islam, time lapse. h/t NES

    /large

  64. Does this burqa make my eyebrows look big?

  65. Powerful article (Ali) which pretty much posits that there is no “reasonable people can disagree” there. If the terms of the negotiation are all or nothing at all, then it’s best to go with nothing at all.

  66. All those fundamentalist patriarchal religions just drive me nuts … I suppose you saw this one from the Values Voters summit down there in florida. They want us to dress modestly so they won’t feel the need to rape us, why don’t we just get that and appreciate it? (sigh)

    http://www.motherjones.com/mojo/2012/09/values-voters-americas-last-prudes

  67. Yes, Dak. Saw that. Un-fricken-real.

  68. That Ayaan Hirsi article was powerful.

  69. Here’s an interesting free speech article from Glenzilla:
    http://www.salon.com/2011/09/04/speech_23/

  70. I saw that too at your place Daki. I was trying to find the pamphlet online but no luck at all. There’s little diff between them and Islam in the ME, except they can’t kill us. Although upthread i listed some states that tried to call killing a woman for abortion, “Justifiable Homicide”. We’re getting there.

  71. I saw it, it has a young black woman’s face on it … I think the original thread I had up when it came out had the pic on it. I’ll go see if I can find it

  72. I saw the cover but all roads led to thinkprogress and nowhere else. I could not find the actual pamphlet. Would love to see that thing, that could bring me off of posting strike.

    But you can’t even imagine some of the odious websites I found with Christians saying we should dress like paintings in victorian era with examples. No kidding. And comments on how they admire Muslim dress. No kidding. I am not making this shit up.

  73. And of course, you all shouldn’t need three guesses as to who was their star speaker this year, should you? Oh yeah, I’m gonna vote.

  74. It’s all the fruit of the seed of the same poisonous tree. Yeah, I just found the cover on TP and that was it although they supposedly have the entire pamphlet.

  75. If you get your hands on that POS, I would appreciate the link.

  76. It seems as if in some parts of the world, we get angry first and think later. I keep looking at these mobs of young men thinking “why aren’t you working?”

    They are so naive and provincial that they believe the US government controls everything because they grew up in socities where the government controls everything, so now that they have their new found freedom to riot they will cow everyone that does not hold their beliefs. I mean, nothing says I believe in God like killing your neighbors.

  77. Uppity, I read a piece that said the pamphlet was from a business that sells patterns to make your own clothes, targeted to these more conservative Christian churches. The business was called, Modesty Matters.

  78. will do… Meanwhile, I’m going back to the oat meal place on orders of Dinah… she thinks I need a refresher course on How to Pet a Kitty

  79. Petting a kitty is an art, not a science. You may have some drawn blood at first, but don’t despair. At least not as long as an artery isn’t involved….

    imust, so then it’s possible the guy was selling his victorian wares at Club Control’s convention. And we all want to sew our own clothing, don’t we? So much free time! Welp, if so, he was in the right place. After I saw some of those sites telling women they must always be pleasant for their husband and other important pieces of stepford advice.

  80. Yeah, I don’t know Uppity. The article I read was in defense of the pamphlet so they may have been full of it, but they did link to the clothing company’s website called Modesty Matters. Now is that the same Modesty Matters that was at the convention? I don’t know. But I couldn’t find the entire pamphlet online either, just the cover.

  81. I remember one commenter asking, what if my husband wants me to dress sexier. the answer was either he will come around or he’s not a good man. No wonder these people all get married over and over again. No different than islam except they do it one at a time, and that’s probably only because it’s the law.

  82. Here’s the quote from the article:

    Not only does Marcotte go on to again out herself as biologically illiterate (or pretending to be) by equating sperm cells with unborn human beings, but she may have set a new world record for straw-grasping. The Summit – like many large political gatherings – had many different exhibitors, each with different interests, businesses, and focuses. Modesty Matters isn’t a political or pro-life advocacy group, but a small business that sells sewing patterns and courses for modest clothing.

  83. Well if a sperm cell is a human being, a lot of guys are going to land in jail for being Onan, whom got killed for spilling his seed upon the ground.

  84. I’m here catching up but re the Forbes piece. Another p.o.v.?

    http://www.humanrightsfirst.org/2012/01/10/abigail-esman-gets-it-wrong-on-free-speech/

  85. Oh and if you want to talk about wing-nuts, fundamentalists and such, we don’t have to go to the M.E for an example of how to treat women; we have our own, right here:

  86. spilling his seed upon the ground

    what about a Kleenex or Puffs? Just curious.

  87. Does that mean people who swallow are cannibals?

  88. Fredster–saw that Pat Robertson thing last week and my head almost exploded!

  89. After watching that Pat Roberson vid, boy howdy, I can sure tell what’s happened to the women on this blog. Refusal to submit!!

  90. Sophie, I had it bookmarked waiting for a good time to use.

    On the other, are people equally guilty if they spit?

  91. I’m not impressed that that the UN resolution under discussion is non-binding. Things that start out as non-binding may become binding over time — the idea that it is somehow OK to ban “hate speech” or “riot-inducing speech,” even if one could magically agree on what those are, is corrosive of the values of a free society. The US Gov’t. that is sworn to protect the US Constitution should not feel free to enter into into any resolutions, binding or not, that would violate any constitutional rights, including the First Amendment. How dare the Obama administration sign on to this dangerous nonsense.

    The First Amendment states (emphasis added):

    Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the government for a redress of grievances.

    The prohibition against the state impinging on freedom of speech has no caveat — certainly none for protecting any religion or religious symbolism from criticism or attack; or for appeasing those who threaten violence as payback for any insult. Not unless we all want to become virtual slaves of those who would kill us for blaspheming against their shibboleths.

    I very much recommend the wisdom of Christopher Hitchens, PBUH, on this issue: http://edthemanicstreetpreacher.wordpress.com/2009/08/26/hitchens-on-free-speech/

  92. LOL Pat Robertson. I could kick the shit out of him myself. See how he likes me submitting standing over him with a baseball bat. Decrepit asshole. All this Godly stuff from the same guy who got caught with a “Charity” plane full of mining equipment — instead of “Food for the poor,” whose bodies he dutifully stepped over on his way to his diamond mine in Africa.

  93. I don’t know about the Kleenex for sure, Fredster, but it’s probably a lessor offense if he was saving it. Maybe just being struck blind or something.

  94. I read it, Upps. I’m a great fan of Ali and of her cause. She’s awfully courageous.

  95. NES: I’m curious about your take on the Greenwald article I linked to above.

  96. “Hate crime”s are b.s., in my view. Ultimately, such laws are punishing a thought crime that leads to a crime. Punish the criminal act, absolutely, but not the thought behind it. The whole notion of “hate crimes” is PC-induced corrosiveness that’s eroded First Amdmt. protections.

  97. I keep looking at these mobs of young men thinking “why aren’t you working?”

    I think the MidEast suffers from chronic unemployment, particularly for young men. Young men out of work are a danger to society.

  98. I’ve printed it out for later reading, SophieCT. I’ll predict though that I’ll agree with Greenwald. My advocacy for free speech is content-free and judgment-free. The cure for ‘dangerous’ or otherwise ‘undesirable’ speech is MORE — not less — speech. Arguing the hell out of something is the best bulwark against ‘bad’ speech; banning it is, at best, an ineffective band-aid.

  99. I’m not impressed that that the UN resolution under discussion is non-binding

    You are, of course, entitled to your own opinion NES.

  100. It always strikes me as strange that people, regardless of religion, perceive their gods to be omnipotent and mighty, yet, they act as if that same god is so fragile that it can’t take an insult, or even a joke. Sounds like someone’s god may have a little ego problem.

  101. Well, considering NES is a lawyer, and she hails from the ME, in my opinion, her opinion carries a lot of weight and credibility.

  102. You are, of course, entitled to your own opinion NES.

    Thanks for telling me that, Fredster. Is that a non-binding resolution?

  103. I’m here catching up but re the Forbes piece. Another p.o.v.?

    http://www.humanrightsfirst.org/2012/01/10/abigail-esman-gets-it-wrong-on-free-speech/

    Yes, certainly another p.o.v. — but not worth the paper it’s written on.

  104. I’m really not going to debate you NES or argue with you. You can save it for another place as far as I’m concerned,or keep it up here, but w/out me.

  105. freespirit, for real. I really have doubts about these people of “great faith.”

  106. Young men out of work are a danger to society.

    Indeed. Also, read somewhere (and could probably drum up a link if required) that statistically, nations where the male population exceeds the female population become violent. I do believe we are in for some trying times.

  107. Sophie you are one terrific person.
    Fredster, don’t debate NES – it never ends well.

  108. Saw a tweet that said the MSM had their shorts all in a bunch over Ali’s Beast piece. If one of those chair warmers ever went thru what she went thru they would have needed a change of shorts four times a day. Bunch of arm chair cowards and agenda pimps for money.

  109. I know! If we want the best analysis maybe we should ask Naomi “I felt so sexy in my hijab on my pleasure trip to the safest city in the safest country in the Middle East” Wolf!

  110. Sophie, China’s male population exceeds women in a huge way, due to their One Baby Rule which caused them to abort females, because females are useless and males are so cool. They are not violent, although they are a bit nervous because 25,000000 of them are now free to go marry themselves, which adds a whole new meaning to the words, Go F*ck Yourselves.

  111. Yes, as I thought, I did do a post on how things are coming along in China these days with 24,000,000 men left to keep in touch with themselves.
    https://uppitywoman08.wordpress.com/2010/01/12/delightful-irony-shortage-of-women-in-china-will-leave-24-million-chinese-men-free-to-marry-themselves/

  112. Ms. Naomi Wolf’s opinion would certainly be valuable!! She was so right about Obama being Christmas, New Year’s and Hanukka all rolled into one..{pant, pant sigh}…..oh wait….

  113. NES, if you’re still here, I was hoping you’d decipher the Wikipedia paragraphs. Looks contradictory to me and I cannot tell what our law really is.

  114. UW: India also has more men than women.

  115. Yeah but at least India’s guys are decent to look at.

  116. Oooo ooo ooo gotta find that naomi video! Race you!

  117. Naomi “Oh he makes me so hot” Wolf starts at 2:35

  118. Sophie, is this the article you’re thinking of?

    http://www.thedailybeast.com/newsweek/2011/03/06/men-without-women.html

  119. “Behind the veil lives a thriving Muslim sexuality” by Naomi “Midlife Crises” Wolf
    http://www.smh.com.au/news/opinion/behind-the-veil-lives-a-thriving-muslim-sexuality/2008/08/29/1219516734637.html

  120. You got it! Dang! You win!

  121. I tried to post Chesler’s response from my post on this but of course, those pieces of shit at PJ Media trashed all her stuff, those sons a bitches, may their patriarchal dicks all fall off. She was a better writer than all those moth-infested dickheads over there put together.

  122. Yeah I won. I want my toaster.

  123. Here’s your toaster!

    Oops! That’s toast…not a toaster….[gulp]….I might be toast soon…..

  124. Blows whistle!

  125. OMG I am watching Naomi and she not only sounds like a child but she looks like such a fool in retrospect, since this is NOT what a feminist looks like.

  126. Yeah but at least India’s guys are decent to look at.

    I work with software engineers. I really do need to bring you in for Bring a Blogger to Work Day.

  127. Worked with plenty of them too sophie. But no thanks. One man is enough work. And especially those Middle Eastern types who think women were put on this earth to serve them. But I do like to look at some of them. Not those scummy ones with food in their beards and wearing a dress, who have an aversion to bathing and deodorant, though.

  128. Hahahaha imust. Now there’s a piece of toast I’d pass up (and that’s saying a lot since I loves me my toast!).

  129. imust is in the corner and can’t come out till I blow the whistle again.

  130. And how to you like your toast, NES? Do you put home made jam on it or just eat it bareback with butter? Perhaps a pinch of cinnamon? Do you dip it in your coffee?

  131. Fredster, don’t debate NES – it never ends well.

    Poor HT — shall I throw a pity-party for you?

    But, then again, not too meek and persecuted to trash me at a neighbor’s site. Here’s HT’s utterly unprovoked unleashing of bile against me at a friendly site:

    25 | HT
    September 17, 2012 at 9:15 pm
    Fredster, just saw your interaction with NES over at Uppity’s. She is the reason I stopped commenting at Uppity’s. My other favorite spot – John Smart’s – she started to comment, became a regular and now I don’t bother with the place. She’s one of those formerly “HIllary supporters”.

    26 | Beata
    September 17, 2012 at 9:28 pm
    @25: HT, don’t get me started on that subject!!! I’m trying to keep my stress level down.

    27 | HT

    September 17, 2012 at 9:35 pm
    Beata, calm down, have some camomile tea and as it’s late, perhaps a hot tub?
    I would like to believe that most people are honest, but when you are head butting a person who is not, it’s difficult. We all learn that lesson at some point – just took me a lot longer than others, which is interesting due to my rather nasty history.
    Why on earth do I still believe that people are good?

  132. I think I have a headache.

  133. At least a migraine, I trust.

  134. There. That’s better.

  135. Do you put home made jam on it or just eat it bareback with butter? Perhaps a pinch of cinnamon? Do you dip it in your coffee?

    Just butter or butter and cheese. And nope, I don’t dip it in my coffee (not an Italian, other than in my dreams…).

  136. I heard pain medication works too, Upps. Lolz

  137. I’m still on a corner…..in Winslow, Arizona…..waiting for a whistle…..

  138. Wow.

  139. Not to belabor a point, but I think this needs to be said. I’m not always right, nor have I ever remotely claimed to be so; I’m passionately opinionated, mostly always, but am ready, willing and able to change my mind if persuaded of the contrary view. in fact, sometimes I’m spectacularly wrong, as with my initial assessment of Jerry Sandusky. That ties in nicely with the HT thread of conversation. When the Sandusky story first broke, I offered up the (wrong) opinion that the man must be gay since he obviously had a thing for boys. SophieCT convinced me, in the most diplomatically-gifted way, that my opinion was balderdash; I got her point right away, and corrected my opinion about Sandusky. HT chose to attack my opinion by getting on her PC high-horse and suggesting, unmistakably, that my opinion stemmed from homophobia. Well, as a lesbian, I of course had to call her on that. That, and some of the following discussion, essentially caused her to exit the blog in a huff, and to stay off for several months. True story, odd though it admittedly is.

  140. imust, I’m whistling to you, babes. Come home.

  141. Thanks NES!
    But are we the only ones here??…….

  142. NES, I don’t even remember that. When was it (roughly)?

  143. imust, people are always here. Sometimes they just don’t make a peep. Maybe they’re eating pie.

  144. hmm….quietly eating pie eh…….

  145. SophieCT, it was whenever the Sandusky scandal first broke. Around early 2011? Not entirely sure about the time period.

  146. I need a pie…a peace pie.

  147. Jon Stewart did a good show tonight. Addressed a few things we talked about today. And John Stewart is going to debate Bill O’Reilly.
    http://www.therumble2012.com/index.html

  148. All I am saying….give a piece of pie a chance….

  149. Peace Pie

    All we are saying is give pie a chance.

  150. ROFLMAO!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

  151. ROFL!!! Did you post that before seeing my post?? Too funny!

  152. Okay everybody….join hands……well eat your pie first…then join hands……and sing! All we are saying…..give peace a chance………

  153. Sorry imust Angi made cheese cake.

  154. imust, we did it at the same time, nearly!

  155. NES responds to a query re: UN non-binding resolution.
    Fred interjects but doesn’t express his counter opinion.
    NES responds to the patronizing comment with a quip.
    Fred escalates the exchange while simultaneously excusing himself from further discussing the discussion he initiated with his initial comment to NES. Then Fred leaves.

    Outsider take: Based on the times I’ve been here when Fred is here, this, in a nutshell, is Fred’s m.o.

    (I’m prepared for the firing squad)

  156. DE, Was it a peace cheese cake?

  157. Sophie Cheesecake is always peaceful….it’s the Switzerland of desserts.

  158. dwp….would you like a cigarette first?

  159. Imust, No thanks, bad for my health.🙂
    I know it’s bad form for a non- regular to critique a regular but I overrode my hesitation because the exchange seemed, to me, unfair.

    Ready, aim ….

  160. Jaysus, there must be a sale on lighter fluid somewhere.

  161. At least have some peaceful cheesecake before you put on the blindfold…..🙂

  162. Is cheesecake a PIE or a cake?

  163. Cake. Cheese Cake

  164. Seems like old times. I am too tired for this. G’ Nite.

  165. Yes but isn’t it made like a pie? With a graham cracker crust? In a PIE pan? Not so cut and dry eh? Things that make you go..hmm…

  166. Berry or cherry piece of peace pie- that is the question.

    Yes is the answer.

    I am so hungry with the change of weather.

    Peace out.

  167. Just you and me dwp. Sure you don’t want a cigarette? I don’t smoke, but I might start…..

  168. What change in weather? Wait! Karen!! come back!!!!

  169. LoL

  170. Well! Isn’t this just great?!?

  171. I guess it could be better. lol

  172. Yep.

  173. Oh well… Enjoy your pie. G’night

  174. Well dwp, like Scarlett Ohara said, “Fiddle-dee-dee, I’ll think about it tomorrow!” 🙂
    ‘night!

  175. Burp…thanks to imust and SophieCT for the pies. XoXo (Chit, glad I wolfed down my share before karen showed up!)

  176. Okay i am going to leave all those comments up children and you can all look at them and figure out where you went wrong. I will expect a written composition of no less than 350 words.

    Furthermore, you all get detention, and I swear, if one more person gets into what looked like an initial non fight and throws lighter fluid on it, i am going to rip your throat out and feed your veins and arteries to my molting dog. Seriously, gang, WTF?

  177. I’m here! I’ll have a cig too.

    Hugs dwp. But, it’s all A-OK. We’re all family here, including Fredster and you. And, there’s always pie aplenty.

  178. Somebody hold me.

  179. “Family” on blog is usually a euphemism for a dysfunctional grouping. An opiate to assist in not speaking up. Passive-aggressive bullshit is not an “initial non-fight”, it’s a backhanded jab.

    Peace. Out. And, good luck.

  180. I’m aware of the nature of all the relationships on this blog dwp, trust me, I do not sleep.

    Everywhere there are always kids in the back seat saying, Stop touching me. But unless it’s otherwise necessary i do prefer to handle things just a tad more diplomatically than to throw all the babies out with the bathwater, ya know?

    The only way there is never an argument of any kind on a blog is when the only person there is teh blogger. Look at it like an Italian family picnic.

  181. I’m not impressed that the UN resolution under discussion is non-binding. Things that start out as non-binding may become binding over time —

    (emhasis mine)

    While reading NES’ comment (which I was anxious to hear, btw) the first part of the two-part sentence gave me pause — until I read on through it — to the reasoning.

    Excellent summation on why a “non-binding resolution” could very well be the initial stage – the introduction of things to come.

    Testing the public’s awareness, intentional leaks, abuse of powers and enactment of same – when the public is distracted by other events – are all daily occurrences now.

    The purposes and use of “propaganda” today is pretty much controlling and molding our society, including its use to rationalize the worst of all possible outcomes at all levels – economic, governmental or militarily, you name it. Think about ‘that.’

    I wholeheartedly agree, NES. Thanks for weighing in.

  182. Aw Jesus kirrrrrrrrrrrrrrrist!.

  183. Now here this. If you have input into this …whatever……..give it to me in email not in front of God and everybody. Put the lighter fluid down. Thanks! I’m closing this thread. Imust wants you to all go over to her place and have a good fight. Right imust???????

  184. Hmmmmmmmmm. I think I am onto somethng here. I can send all kinds of traffic to imust. Heh.

  185. Imust is setting up a nice pie throwing thread for all of you.. Don’t miss it.
    http://pie2012.wordpress.com/

Comments are closed.