Bet she uses those teeth of hers.

Meh.. might +1, but you missed the easy chance at using "WorldNutDaily", you know, being teh clevers.

CRAZY EYES



You know em when you see em.

Is the tag off tonight?

I read the article title as "WorldNetDaily Can't Stop Washing Oily Taints"

/It's actually "WorldNetDaily Can't Stop Whitewashing Orly Taitz"

Meh, seen better, had worse......

/ had no standards as a youth. It moved, had a vagina and I was willing to romp her.

The article basically rehashes everything that's gone on with Orly, and states that WND is a biased site that's willing to overlook reality to promote a specific political view. This was a relatively unnecessary article. It brought nothing new to the table, as most rational people know Orly is crazy, and WND is just right-wing rhetoric.

Wonderful what you people focus on.

Phil Moskowitz: Wonderful what you people focus on.

Does any body really listen to this person? Wow, just wow. Maybe if we'd just ignore anything this bunch has to say, they'd crawl in a hole and die from lack of attention.

Larry Sinclair -- best known for his claims that he did drugs and had sex with Barack Obama

Just get a hot air balloon man.

WND is up?

I hate it when lawyers use numbers (numbers) twice (twice) because there is no reasons one (one) use of the number (number) is not enough.

Stop it at once (once)!

If Taitz goes down, so does WorldNetDaily

Wouldn't that be just horrible. JUST HORRIBLE!

/really, I'm crying on the inside, this laughter is just for show.

Shvetz: The article basically rehashes everything that's gone on with Orly, and states that WND is a biased site that's willing to overlook reality to promote a specific political view. This was a relatively unnecessary article. It brought nothing new to the table, as most rational people know Orly is crazy, and WND is just right-wing rhetoric.


Huffington Post is a biased site that's willing to overlook reality to promote a specific political view. This was a relatively unnecessary article. It brought nothing new to the table, as most rational people know Hufington Post is just left-wing rhetoric.

Pretty well applies to any news source -CNN, Fox, MSNBC, (fill in the blank) Never depend on one source for information. You have to find the truth for yourself.

portscanner: Shvetz: The article basically rehashes everything that's gone on with Orly, and states that WND is a biased site that's willing to overlook reality to promote a specific political view. This was a relatively unnecessary article. It brought nothing new to the table, as most rational people know Orly is crazy, and WND is just right-wing rhetoric.


Huffington Post is a biased site that's willing to overlook reality to promote a specific political view. This was a relatively unnecessary article. It brought nothing new to the table, as most rational people know Hufington Post is just left-wing rhetoric.

Pretty well applies to any news source -CNN, Fox, MSNBC, (fill in the blank) Never depend on one source for information. You have to find the truth for yourself.

They're both bad, so read WND?

WND is completely in a league of its own. It makes Fox look honest.

Emposter: It makes Fox look honest.

Whoa! Slow down there, trigger. I think you might be sliding into hyperbole there.

Emposter: portscanner: Shvetz: The article basically rehashes everything that's gone on with Orly, and states that WND is a biased site that's willing to overlook reality to promote a specific political view. This was a relatively unnecessary article. It brought nothing new to the table, as most rational people know Orly is crazy, and WND is just right-wing rhetoric.


Huffington Post is a biased site that's willing to overlook reality to promote a specific political view. This was a relatively unnecessary article. It brought nothing new to the table, as most rational people know Hufington Post is just left-wing rhetoric.

Pretty well applies to any news source -CNN, Fox, MSNBC, (fill in the blank) Never depend on one source for information. You have to find the truth for yourself.

They're both bad, so read WND?

WND is completely in a league of its own. It makes Fox look honest.

Where do you get "They're both bad, so read WND?" I said they ALL sux. It is up to you to find the truth in what all of them report.

Or is your point of view, "If you disagree with X, you must agree with Y?"

NewportBarGuy: Not even if I was three sheets to the wind, it was 2am, and she was the last chick in the bar.

That is just nasty.

I'd do it, but I'd make sure to hide the utensils first

In completly unrelated news, yesterday The First Family doled out dried fruits to more than 2,000 trick-or-treaters

This article assumes WND is somehow viewed as a legitimate news source. I'm pretty sure everyone there is reading it for the lulz or a mentally unstable conspiracy theorist hiding in a basement adorned with ruby ridge posters.

portscanner: Emposter: portscanner: Shvetz: The article basically rehashes everything that's gone on with Orly, and states that WND is a biased site that's willing to overlook reality to promote a specific political view. This was a relatively unnecessary article. It brought nothing new to the table, as most rational people know Orly is crazy, and WND is just right-wing rhetoric.


Huffington Post is a biased site that's willing to overlook reality to promote a specific political view. This was a relatively unnecessary article. It brought nothing new to the table, as most rational people know Hufington Post is just left-wing rhetoric.

Pretty well applies to any news source -CNN, Fox, MSNBC, (fill in the blank) Never depend on one source for information. You have to find the truth for yourself.

They're both bad, so read WND?

WND is completely in a league of its own. It makes Fox look honest.

Where do you get "They're both bad, so read WND?" I said they ALL sux. It is up to you to find the truth in what all of them report.

Or is your point of view, "If you disagree with X, you must agree with Y?"

It's a slight variation on the "so vote republican" meme, which is premised on the idea that a Farker is, incorrectly, claiming that because two things are bad, they are thus EQUALLY bad, which appears to be exactly what you did.

It's not really that complicated, but I can see why you might have problems, since you appear brain damaged to the degree that you believe WND is no more biased than the Huffington Post or other news sources.

Criminy, without elections to focus on, political commentary goes meta in a big way. What a pointless article.

make me some tea: "You testifying that three (3) members of Obama's church were murdered will help me establish that expedited delivery is necessary because people wind up dead over Obama."

Someone should use that reasoning to get things moving with Glenn Beck...

IXI Jim IXI: Someone should use that reasoning to get things moving with Glenn Beck...

Despite being a tired meme, that was a pretty good usage.

Can we have a [Pleasepleasepleasepleasepleasepleaseplease] tag?

Orly? I don't go down on taints.

No, WorldNetDaily will still be around to provide partisan crazy nonsense.

Just like Huffington Post.

randomjsa: Just like Huffington Post.

Imagine the wild crazy sex a threeway with Taitz and Arianna

A conspiracy theory about the schemes of conspiracy theorists? Surely you jest!

A simpler explanation is to appeal to the psychology of cranks and cults. They simply believe what they want to believe, in the face of overwhelming evidence to the contrary.

Credibility? Nobody takes WND seriously, except for Taitz and Farah's fellow cranks, who will believe anything they tell them.

randomjsa: No, WorldNetDaily will still be around to provide partisan crazy nonsense.

Just like Huffington Post.

bot sids r xacly teh sam!

randomjsa: No, WorldNetDaily will still be around to provide partisan crazy nonsense.

Just like Huffington Post.

Why am I not surprised you would think this...

False Equivalence anyone? (new window)

Phil Moskowitz: Wonderful what you people focus on.

Amazing what egregious nonsense you people will believe.

Sgt Otter:
There's now an "Obama trail of bodies" chain email going around the wignutosphere. The funny part? The same guy appears on both lists, being killed by Clinton in the 80s, then apparently dug up and re-murdered by Obama in the 90s.

Did you know that Barack Obama raped and killed a young girl in 1990?

/he hasn't denied it
//probably doesn't have the same legs as the Beck one