Making Baby Jesus Cry

[Penske_Account]

Originally posted by Hank Chinaski
"jack booted" only describes fashion anymore in certain gay circles. the term is now used to desribe a quality or style of behavior.

As to Nixon, he should have had one of the younger staff attorneys on the Senate investigation team killed to provide a warning to them to back off. That's the way clinton would have played it, and that's nothing Hillary wouldn't have appreciated as the smart play and what she had coming.

Hank, please respect the NRZ. Nixon is dead, Clinton is out of office. As for Hillary, what has she said today? Perhaps there is a current policy proclamation that we can examine and discuss before it loses its relevancy in the NRZ tonight.

[Shape Shifter]

Originally posted by Penske_Account
Please post on topic instead of this typical drivel. Drivel is appropriate on the general board, this board is for politics.

You are mad with mod power. I predict an Insurgency.

[Replaced_Texan]

Originally posted by Shape Shifter
You are mad with mod power. I predict an Insurgency.

2. Has a manifesto been drawn up yet? Can I be a bandolera?

[Shape Shifter]

Originally posted by Replaced_Texan
2. Has a manifesto been drawn up yet?

Insurgencies take time. I'm still waiting to get the photoshop work back from Hank.

[Mmmm, Burger (C.J.)]

Originally posted by Hank Chinaski
Under this test TaxWonk current line is not schtick.

The shtick was funny at first, then not so much. Fortunately for Wonk, there are still two other longer-running, no-longer-funny shticks still going here.

So, Mr. Pot, may I introduce you to Mr. Kettle?

[Hank Chinaski]

Originally posted by Mmmm, Burger (C.J.)
The shtick was funny at first, then not so much. Fortunately for Wonk, there are still two other longer-running, no-longer-funny shticks still going here.

So, Mr. Pot, may I introduce you to Mr. Kettle?

You assume you have the ability to identify funny based upon what?

At least I know that the bulk of my posts here are anti-social drivel. The real funny thing is that you apparently think you are making some points with your own drivel.

[Penske_Account]

I am considering a move, for work reasons, to Manhattan. As such, I will be subject to the Senatorial representation of the New York Senators. I understand that the New York Senate seat of Senator Hillary Clinton will be up for contest. I have not heard whether or not she is running for re-election, but of course in a NRZ whatever she said yesterday is meaningless anyway. But for today's purposes, has anyone heard if Mrs. Clinton has made a statement on her candidacy today?

If she has, and it is yes, I would want to ask her, because of course I am concerned about the continuity of leadership and my Senator's committment to office and the relevant electorate, "Senator, if the voters of NY send you back to the Senate, will you pledge to serve a full term???"

It would be nice if she could answer today, but of course, in a NRZ her answer will be meaningless tomorrow, so I guess I will have to ask again.

[Penske_Account]

Originally posted by Replaced_Texan
2. Has a manifesto been drawn up yet? Can I be a bandolera?

Do bandolera's wear leather chaps?

[Penske_Account]

Originally posted by Mmmm, Burger (C.J.)
The shtick was funny at first, then not so much. Fortunately for Wonk, there are still two other longer-running, no-longer-funny shticks still going here.

So, Mr. Pot, may I introduce you to Mr. Kettle?

Burger, if, on Wonk's provocation, we had not set up a NRZ, I would ask you why an examination of Arafat or Clinton (and by the use of the singular, I mean both parties to the self-pro-claimed co-presidency) and their misdeeds, philoshophies, hateful statements, crimes and abuses of office are not relevant to current events, but I can't, because we have stipulated past acts have no bearing on the present.

What's odd is, I was watching some talking head show last night with Charles Krauthammer and Juan Williams and some others (one other lib one other conservative) and they were debating writings that Judge Roberts made 20 years ago as a member of Reagan's justice department. Why? Where is the relevancy? If Arafat's words from several years ago as the leader of the Palestinians through several months ago have no bearing or effect on today's Palestinians, what possible insight can be gained from looking at Roberts work-for-hire from twenty years ago?

[Penske_Account]

Originally posted by Hank Chinaski
You assume you have the ability to identify funny based upon what?

.

I think The Paigow once said Burger was not so funny, but of course, there is no responsibility for such a past statement.

Perhaps I could IM her for a current analysis.

[Hank Chinaski]

Originally posted by Penske_Account
I think The Paigow once said Burger was not so funny, but of course, there is no responsibility for such a past statement.

Perhaps I could IM her for a current analysis.

Let me see if I can follow your current schtick- But since she'd be making the analysis based upon his posts over the last few months the analysis itself would be of no value, as it would be stale.

[Not Bob]

Originally posted by Shape Shifter
So, um, how did it end?

Not Happily.

[Penske_Account]

Originally posted by Hank Chinaski
Let me see if I can follow your current schtick- But since she'd be making the analysis based upon his posts over the last few months the analysis itself would be of no value, as it would be stale.

Not necessarily, knee jerk opinions count, they just have to be assessed as such. Although as we move forward in a past-free, consequenceless world, we will get used the concept.

[Not Bob]

Originally posted by Hank Chinaski
Let me see if I can follow your current schtick- But since she'd be making the analysis based upon his posts over the last few months the analysis itself would be of no value, as it would be stale.

You two really are the Alphonse and Gaston of this place.

[Hank Chinaski]

Originally posted by Not Bob
You two really are the Alphonse and Gaston of this place.

i'm really tall.