If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(Mediaite)   Rom-ney (v). 1. to defecate in terror   (mediaite.com) divider line 232
    More: Amusing, Rachel Maddow, seat belt laws, American middle class, Clark Griswold, long campaign, Tagg Romney, South Carolina, Mitt Romney  
•       •       •

4335 clicks; posted to Politics » on 13 Jan 2012 at 10:09 AM (2 years ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



232 Comments   (+0 »)
   
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

Archived thread
 
2012-01-13 09:33:44 AM
Meh. Seriously, there doesn't need to be an increased lexicon for each candidate.

But if we must:

Huntsman: v To ignore party lines and work across aisles for the good of all...then get punished for it.

Perry: v. To shoot your load alone on a Saturday night

Gingrich: v. To cheat on your wife with an owl.
 
2012-01-13 09:39:48 AM

stpauler: Meh. Seriously, there doesn't need to be an increased lexicon for each candidate.

But if we must:

Huntsman: v To ignore party lines and work across aisles for the good of all...then get punished for it.

Perry: v. To shoot your load alone on a Saturday night

Gingrich: v. To cheat on your wife with an owl.


Obama: n. Self-contradictory evil.
 
2012-01-13 09:40:26 AM
Romney's gonna wipe out Santorum.
 
vpb [TotalFark]
2012-01-13 09:43:02 AM
Obama: n. Self-contradictory evil

Obama: n. Self-contradictory evil black.


FIFY
 
2012-01-13 09:51:40 AM
FTFA:

It's not that Romney put his dog on the roof. Remember how different standards were in 1983.

Yeah, those were heady times.

Back in '83, we made our dogs ride on top of the car until they sh*t all over our luggage all the time. We called it "Sh*t-riding," and you weren't nothin unless you did it.
 
2012-01-13 10:00:46 AM

stpauler: Gingrich: v. To cheat on your wife with an owl.


I almost burst out laughing at work over that one. Well done, sir.
 
2012-01-13 10:01:59 AM
Romney claimed the dog enjoyed those rides, and would even climb up there himself. That's a dog I can relate to. Whenever I'm having the time of my life -- boom! -- diarrhea.
 
2012-01-13 10:06:00 AM

thismomentinblackhistory: Romney claimed the dog enjoyed those rides, and would even climb up there himself. That's a dog I can relate to. Whenever I'm having the time of my life -- boom! -- diarrhea.


cha cha cha

/Sorry, it's a reflex. Too much Beavis and Butthead.
 
2012-01-13 10:12:10 AM
Did you guys see that interview? Hilarious. He was trying to say that the dog was safe from the wind because he was in an airtight crate. Am I the only one who sees the problem with putting a dog in an airtight crate?
 
2012-01-13 10:12:58 AM

vpb: Obama: n. Self-contradictory evil

Obama: n. Self-contradictory evil black.


FIFY


Your term is too PC.
 
2012-01-13 10:13:44 AM
Old-ass non stories rock!
 
2012-01-13 10:14:11 AM

CPennypacker: Did you guys see that interview? Hilarious. He was trying to say that the dog was safe from the wind because he was in an airtight crate. Am I the only one who sees the problem with putting a dog in an airtight crate?


No. I was wondering why none of the pundits noticed. I think Romney said it was airtight to debunk the notion that feces could have escaped, but forgot that something has to get in.
 
2012-01-13 10:15:33 AM
I thought we were going with Romnez?
 
2012-01-13 10:19:08 AM

Ricardo Klement: CPennypacker: Did you guys see that interview? Hilarious. He was trying to say that the dog was safe from the wind because he was in an airtight crate. Am I the only one who sees the problem with putting a dog in an airtight crate?

No. I was wondering why none of the pundits noticed. I think Romney said it was airtight to debunk the notion that feces could have escaped, but forgot that something has to get in.


I think Rachel Maddow wondered if the dog was in scuba gear.

But I think the main message here was that Romney's response to this was to hose off the dog and car, then get back in the car and KEEP DRIVING WITH THE DOG ON THE ROOF.
 
2012-01-13 10:21:38 AM
It is usable in a sentence... "whoa, dude almost crashed into a tuck, I bet he romneyed himself on that one"

after some plays a scary prank on you "What the fark man, you want me to romney all over your floor or something?"
 
2012-01-13 10:22:13 AM
Well at least Rachel Maddow is reporting on an important story and not just pushing a liberal agenda..
 
2012-01-13 10:22:22 AM

Ricardo Klement: CPennypacker: Did you guys see that interview? Hilarious. He was trying to say that the dog was safe from the wind because he was in an airtight crate. Am I the only one who sees the problem with putting a dog in an airtight crate?

No. I was wondering why none of the pundits noticed. I think Romney said it was airtight to debunk the notion that feces could have escaped, but forgot that something has to get in.


I think he meant that it was wind proof in that the dog was not getting blasted by 75 mph winds. His explanation that the dog loved to ride up there doesn't work though. A 15 minute ride to the park is not quite the same as a 8-10 hour road trip. And the fact that he hosed the obviously distressed dog off and put him right back up there shows he lacks any empathy.

Although it's that calmness and ability to easily withstand others pain that made him a success at Bain, so I guess he has that going for him.
 
2012-01-13 10:23:09 AM

madcan34: Well at least Rachel Maddow is reporting on an important story and not just pushing a liberal agenda..


... that's all you've got? "A liberal pundit is acting liberal"?
 
2012-01-13 10:23:14 AM
They should at least have included the link:

spreadingromney.com (new window)
 
2012-01-13 10:23:52 AM

madcan34: Well at least Rachel Maddow is reporting on an important story and not just pushing a liberal agenda..


it's almost like she's a pundit...
 
2012-01-13 10:24:17 AM

madcan34: Well at least Rachel Maddow is reporting on an important story and not just pushing a liberal agenda..


It is kind of important that people are aware that Romney is a sociopath.
 
2012-01-13 10:25:06 AM
I used to have an old dog that would romney whenever I sneaked up on him while he was sleeping.
 
2012-01-13 10:26:46 AM
Only 1% of all dogs get the view from on top of a station wagon during an international trip.

A scene in National Lampoon's Vacation of the dog on the station wagon was cut for being too elitist.
 
2012-01-13 10:27:37 AM
I thought all robots came with Asimov's Three Rules? Do they not extend to our canine friends?
 
2012-01-13 10:28:54 AM

stpauler: Meh. Seriously, there doesn't need to be an increased lexicon for each candidate.

But if we must:

Huntsman: v To ignore party lines and work across aisles for the good of all...then get punished for it.

Perry: v. To shoot your load alone on a Saturday night

Gingrich: v. To cheat on your wife with an owl.


I was planning on gingriching last weekend, but my wife caught wind and kept me home. Ended up attempting to perry quietly in the bathroom, but she opened the door while I was mid-perry. I was so stunned I farking romneyed all over the place.

Still trying to clean that mess up.
 
2012-01-13 10:29:04 AM

vpb: Obama: n. Self-contradictory evil

Obama: n. Self-contradictory evil black blah.


FIFY


FTFIFYFY.
 
2012-01-13 10:29:32 AM
meh, probably not gonna happen.
 
2012-01-13 10:29:50 AM

madcan34: Well at least Rachel Maddow is reporting on an important story and not just pushing a liberal agenda..


In comparison to FoxNews, where any statement by any person on the entire channel has been verified by two independent sources; usually Glenn Beck and Andrew Breitbart.
 
2012-01-13 10:30:27 AM

RevLovejoy: stpauler: Meh. Seriously, there doesn't need to be an increased lexicon for each candidate.

But if we must:

Huntsman: v To ignore party lines and work across aisles for the good of all...then get punished for it.

Perry: v. To shoot your load alone on a Saturday night

Gingrich: v. To cheat on your wife with an owl.

I was planning on gingriching last weekend, but my wife caught wind and kept me home. Ended up attempting to perry quietly in the bathroom, but she opened the door while I was mid-perry. I was so stunned I farking romneyed all over the place.

Still trying to clean that mess up.


If you Huntsman with her, maybe she will whip you a couple of times.
 
2012-01-13 10:32:43 AM
Back then, I was a kid sloshing around in the cargo section of my family's station wagon, competing with my equally unbuckled younger sister to see how many passing truck drivers we could get to pull their horns.

Not sure how old Maddow and her sister were but probably too young to be exposing their breasts to truckers.
 
2012-01-13 10:33:16 AM

BloodySaxon: Old-ass non stories rock!


It shows one of Romney's character traits. It shows what kind of man he is. That it happened years ago and defends it today shows he hasn't changed. It was a deeply cruel and creepy thing to do, and will make most Americas pause when they think of Romney.
 
2012-01-13 10:36:12 AM
i.imgur.com
i.imgur.com
 
2012-01-13 10:36:23 AM
Can someone else please get that neologism up and running so we're assured a completely scatological GOP ticket when it's Romney/Santorum.

I'd do it myself but I have to be at the gym in 26 minutes.
 
2012-01-13 10:43:35 AM

EvilEgg: stpauler: Meh. Seriously, there doesn't need to be an increased lexicon for each candidate.

But if we must:

Huntsman: v To ignore party lines and work across aisles for the good of all...then get punished for it.

Perry: v. To shoot your load alone on a Saturday night

Gingrich: v. To cheat on your wife with an owl.

Obama: n. Self-contradictory evil.


emergency-pants.net
 
2012-01-13 10:46:50 AM
www.posters.ws
 
2012-01-13 10:46:59 AM
"Clintoned in the boobies".

\You're slipping, Fark.
 
2012-01-13 10:48:25 AM
Romney and his family in the car = Large corporations & the 1%

The dog in the box on the top of the car = The working class & poor

That is what wold worry me about a Romney presidency. He might find a workable solution to a problem, but it might not be the best solution for those he deems "lesser" than him. Meanwhile Romney and those he panders to will benefit greatly from the solution.
 
2012-01-13 10:51:16 AM
Obama's dog:

www.barack-obama-photos.com

Romney's dog:

cdn3.hark.com
 
2012-01-13 10:51:55 AM
i492.photobucket.com
 
2012-01-13 10:55:59 AM

heavymetal: Romney and his family in the car = Large corporations & the 1%

The dog in the box on the top of the car = The working class & poor

That is what wold worry me about a Romney presidency. He might find a workable solution to a problem, but it might not be the best solution for those he deems "lesser" than him. Meanwhile Romney and those he panders to will benefit greatly from the solution.


The sad thing is, if you tried to explain that metaphor for Americans, half of them would ask "what's a meta for?".
 
2012-01-13 10:58:24 AM

LasersHurt: madcan34: Well at least Rachel Maddow is reporting on an important story and not just pushing a liberal agenda..

... that's all you've got? "A liberal pundit is acting liberal"?


Commenting on a Gingrich campaign ad is liberal media lamestream driveby MSM terrorism.

Cletus C.: Not sure how old Maddow and her sister were but probably too young to be exposing their breasts to truckers.


You're never too young to expose your breasts to truckers. Truckers are sick individuals.
 
2012-01-13 11:00:57 AM

heavymetal: Romney and his family in the car = Large corporations & the 1%

The dog in the box on the top of the car = The working class & poor


And when we shiat ourselves in the form of OWS protests, they'll pull over, have the police clear the parks, hose down the encampments, and get back to business as usual.
 
2012-01-13 11:03:34 AM

Ricardo Klement: heavymetal: Romney and his family in the car = Large corporations & the 1%

The dog in the box on the top of the car = The working class & poor

And when we shiat ourselves in the form of OWS protests, they'll pull over, have the police clear the parks, hose down the encampments, and get back to business as usual.


I wouldn't say that the OWS protests are people "shiatting themselves." It's more like the mournful wailing the dog did because he was scared he would die as he was shoved into the crate and the car accelerated.
 
2012-01-13 11:06:35 AM
why is the silver spoon, 1%er Romney family taking a road trip in a wood paneled Chevy station wagon?
 
2012-01-13 11:07:11 AM
It isnt often but I gotta disagree with Maddow on this one. Yeah, actually I do want a cold emotionless president making decisions, not someone who is going to make a stupid decision because he's following his/her emotions.

What's more, no, this story does not have legs. It actually sounded like a pretty reasonable thing to do, I'd venture the dog did not fit in the car and the family wanted to bring it with. It wasn't a cold calculated crisis management, he hosed the dog off. It's not like he just kept driving. Lots of reasons to attack Romney, this isn't one.
 
2012-01-13 11:10:17 AM

skullkrusher: why is the silver spoon, 1%er Romney family taking a road trip in a wood paneled Chevy station wagon?


The station wagon is a metaphor; even though it got some dents and dings, Mitt's love for his family remained intact. Mitt had a dream for his family. All he wanted to do was take them to the best theme park in the country. It was a long drive fraught with terrible obstacles. The matriarch of the family even died along the way! Then there was the frightening detour in St. Louis. All along, Mitt and his family happily drank the Kool-Aid. Even though it was sometimes hard to stay awake and stay focused, Mitt finally gave his family the vacation they deserved.
 
2012-01-13 11:12:24 AM

lennavan: It isnt often but I gotta disagree with Maddow on this one. Yeah, actually I do want a cold emotionless president making decisions, not someone who is going to make a stupid decision because he's following his/her emotions.

What's more, no, this story does not have legs. It actually sounded like a pretty reasonable thing to do, I'd venture the dog did not fit in the car and the family wanted to bring it with. It wasn't a cold calculated crisis management, he hosed the dog off. It's not like he just kept driving. Lots of reasons to attack Romney, this isn't one.


He hosed the dog off then he put him back in the crate and kept driving. He was wrong and so are you.
 
2012-01-13 11:12:37 AM

gimmegimme: skullkrusher: why is the silver spoon, 1%er Romney family taking a road trip in a wood paneled Chevy station wagon?

The station wagon is a metaphor; even though it got some dents and dings, Mitt's love for his family remained intact. Mitt had a dream for his family. All he wanted to do was take them to the best theme park in the country. It was a long drive fraught with terrible obstacles. The matriarch of the family even died along the way! Then there was the frightening detour in St. Louis. All along, Mitt and his family happily drank the Kool-Aid. Even though it was sometimes hard to stay awake and stay focused, Mitt finally gave his family the vacation they deserved.


I think I've seen that. It was called "The Bus That Couldn't Slow Down"
 
2012-01-13 11:13:33 AM

CPennypacker: lennavan: It isnt often but I gotta disagree with Maddow on this one. Yeah, actually I do want a cold emotionless president making decisions, not someone who is going to make a stupid decision because he's following his/her emotions.

What's more, no, this story does not have legs. It actually sounded like a pretty reasonable thing to do, I'd venture the dog did not fit in the car and the family wanted to bring it with. It wasn't a cold calculated crisis management, he hosed the dog off. It's not like he just kept driving. Lots of reasons to attack Romney, this isn't one.

He hosed the dog off then he put him back in the crate and kept driving. He was wrong and so are you.


never been a fan of dogs and don't know much about them. If we're not upset about him putting the dog in the crate in the first place, why are we upset about him putting the dog back in the crate after cleaning him off?
 
2012-01-13 11:14:45 AM
So who's going to be the first to Romney some Santorum?
 
2012-01-13 11:16:10 AM

skullkrusher: CPennypacker: lennavan: It isnt often but I gotta disagree with Maddow on this one. Yeah, actually I do want a cold emotionless president making decisions, not someone who is going to make a stupid decision because he's following his/her emotions.

What's more, no, this story does not have legs. It actually sounded like a pretty reasonable thing to do, I'd venture the dog did not fit in the car and the family wanted to bring it with. It wasn't a cold calculated crisis management, he hosed the dog off. It's not like he just kept driving. Lots of reasons to attack Romney, this isn't one.

He hosed the dog off then he put him back in the crate and kept driving. He was wrong and so are you.

never been a fan of dogs and don't know much about them. If we're not upset about him putting the dog in the crate in the first place, why are we upset about him putting the dog back in the crate after cleaning him off?


Well, his argument was that the dog loved to go up there. So when the dog shiats itself in terror shouldn't that be a clue that maybe he doesn't like it so much?
 
2012-01-13 11:17:32 AM

CPennypacker: skullkrusher: CPennypacker: lennavan: It isnt often but I gotta disagree with Maddow on this one. Yeah, actually I do want a cold emotionless president making decisions, not someone who is going to make a stupid decision because he's following his/her emotions.

What's more, no, this story does not have legs. It actually sounded like a pretty reasonable thing to do, I'd venture the dog did not fit in the car and the family wanted to bring it with. It wasn't a cold calculated crisis management, he hosed the dog off. It's not like he just kept driving. Lots of reasons to attack Romney, this isn't one.

He hosed the dog off then he put him back in the crate and kept driving. He was wrong and so are you.

never been a fan of dogs and don't know much about them. If we're not upset about him putting the dog in the crate in the first place, why are we upset about him putting the dog back in the crate after cleaning him off?

Well, his argument was that the dog loved to go up there. So when the dog shiats itself in terror shouldn't that be a clue that maybe he doesn't like it so much?


sometimes dogs shiat themselves because they have to shiat, no? Who says it "shiat itself in terror"? Dr Rachel?
 
2012-01-13 11:18:20 AM

skullkrusher: CPennypacker: skullkrusher: CPennypacker: lennavan: It isnt often but I gotta disagree with Maddow on this one. Yeah, actually I do want a cold emotionless president making decisions, not someone who is going to make a stupid decision because he's following his/her emotions.

What's more, no, this story does not have legs. It actually sounded like a pretty reasonable thing to do, I'd venture the dog did not fit in the car and the family wanted to bring it with. It wasn't a cold calculated crisis management, he hosed the dog off. It's not like he just kept driving. Lots of reasons to attack Romney, this isn't one.

He hosed the dog off then he put him back in the crate and kept driving. He was wrong and so are you.

never been a fan of dogs and don't know much about them. If we're not upset about him putting the dog in the crate in the first place, why are we upset about him putting the dog back in the crate after cleaning him off?

Well, his argument was that the dog loved to go up there. So when the dog shiats itself in terror shouldn't that be a clue that maybe he doesn't like it so much?

sometimes dogs shiat themselves because they have to shiat, no? Who says it "shiat itself in terror"? Dr Rachel?


OK, maybe it shiat itself because it was sick. Shouldn't he take it down if its sick?
 
2012-01-13 11:18:20 AM

lennavan: It isnt often but I gotta disagree with Maddow on this one. Yeah, actually I do want a cold emotionless president making decisions, not someone who is going to make a stupid decision because he's following his/her emotions.


A stupid decision like torturing a dog just because his kids wanted to bring it with, even though it was impractical?

No, Romney would never make an irrational decision like that.
 
2012-01-13 11:18:44 AM

sprawl15: Cletus C.: Not sure how old Maddow and her sister were but probably too young to be exposing their breasts to truckers.

You're never too young to expose your breasts to truckers. Truckers are sick individuals.


Truckers are the kind of people who think lap dances are better when the stripper is crying. Or that road head is better if you're also drinking a cartoon of milk with the girl's face on it.
 
2012-01-13 11:19:35 AM

skullkrusher: never been a fan of dogs and don't know much about them. If we're not upset about him putting the dog in the crate in the first place, why are we upset about him putting the dog back in the crate after cleaning him off?


Who's this "we," paleface?
 
2012-01-13 11:19:38 AM

skullkrusher: CPennypacker: skullkrusher: CPennypacker: lennavan: It isnt often but I gotta disagree with Maddow on this one. Yeah, actually I do want a cold emotionless president making decisions, not someone who is going to make a stupid decision because he's following his/her emotions.

What's more, no, this story does not have legs. It actually sounded like a pretty reasonable thing to do, I'd venture the dog did not fit in the car and the family wanted to bring it with. It wasn't a cold calculated crisis management, he hosed the dog off. It's not like he just kept driving. Lots of reasons to attack Romney, this isn't one.

He hosed the dog off then he put him back in the crate and kept driving. He was wrong and so are you.

never been a fan of dogs and don't know much about them. If we're not upset about him putting the dog in the crate in the first place, why are we upset about him putting the dog back in the crate after cleaning him off?

Well, his argument was that the dog loved to go up there. So when the dog shiats itself in terror shouldn't that be a clue that maybe he doesn't like it so much?

sometimes dogs shiat themselves because they have to shiat, no? Who says it "shiat itself in terror"? Dr Rachel?


Well, it should be pointed out that Rachel Maddow does indeed hold a Doctorate granted by Oxford. She's not a medical doctor by any stretch, but Dr. Maddow is a lot smarter than most of us. (And most, if not all, of the jokers hoping for the Republican nomination.)
 
2012-01-13 11:22:32 AM

CPennypacker: OK, maybe it shiat itself because it was sick. Shouldn't he take it down if its sick?


Or maybe it shat itself because Romney would make a bad President so that's why he put it back on the roof?
 
2012-01-13 11:23:57 AM

skullkrusher: CPennypacker: OK, maybe it shiat itself because it was sick. Shouldn't he take it down if its sick?

Or maybe it shat itself because Romney would make a bad President so that's why he put it back on the roof?


Do you have disassociative identity disorder or something?
 
2012-01-13 11:24:00 AM

gimmegimme: Well, it should be pointed out that Rachel Maddow does indeed hold a Doctorate granted by Oxford. She's not a medical doctor by any stretch, but Dr. Maddow is a lot smarter than most of us. (And most, if not all, of the jokers hoping for the Republican nomination.)


Is her doctorate in time travel and veterinary medicine?
 
2012-01-13 11:24:09 AM

skullkrusher: CPennypacker: OK, maybe it shiat itself because it was sick. Shouldn't he take it down if its sick?

Or maybe it shat itself because Romney would make a bad President so that's why he put it back on the roof?


So can you clarify? Do you feel Romnito did the wrong thing in putting the dog in a crate attached to the roof of the car?
 
2012-01-13 11:25:40 AM

gimmegimme: Obama's dog:



Romney's dog:


Came for that pic of the Griswolds, leaving satisfied.
 
2012-01-13 11:25:59 AM

CPennypacker: skullkrusher: CPennypacker: OK, maybe it shiat itself because it was sick. Shouldn't he take it down if its sick?

Or maybe it shat itself because Romney would make a bad President so that's why he put it back on the roof?

Do you have disassociative identity disorder or something?


why? because I find your attempts to find reasons why the dog shat itself aside from "dogs sometimes takes shiats" to be amusing?
 
2012-01-13 11:27:28 AM
One wonders why MSNBC's ratings are in the shiatter (pun intended).

If this is all they have to biatch about re: Romney, I feel sorry for Obama in November. Surely they could find something substantive to biatch about in Romey's record.



/non issue
//shiat wont stick to the wall
//as Stephen King says, "shiat wipes off"
 
2012-01-13 11:27:44 AM

gimmegimme: skullkrusher: CPennypacker: OK, maybe it shiat itself because it was sick. Shouldn't he take it down if its sick?

Or maybe it shat itself because Romney would make a bad President so that's why he put it back on the roof?

So can you clarify? Do you feel Romnito did the wrong thing in putting the dog in a crate attached to the roof of the car?


It sounds kinda weird to me to be honest but I don't know if this is a common thing. He built a windshield apparently. I know dogs like to stick their heads out the window... I dunno. However, I've accepted the fact that it is kosher for the sake of argument and am now wondering why putting the dog back on the roof was a bad thing.
 
2012-01-13 11:28:41 AM

skullkrusher: CPennypacker: skullkrusher: CPennypacker: OK, maybe it shiat itself because it was sick. Shouldn't he take it down if its sick?

Or maybe it shat itself because Romney would make a bad President so that's why he put it back on the roof?

Do you have disassociative identity disorder or something?

why? because I find your attempts to find reasons why the dog shat itself aside from "dogs sometimes takes shiats" to be amusing?


If you're feeding them the right food, no dogs sometimes don't randomly take sh*ts. They're pretty regular.

Anyway, the point is, if Romney can't keep his dog from sh*tting all over his car, how's he going to run an entire country?
 
2012-01-13 11:29:14 AM

skullkrusher: CPennypacker: skullkrusher: CPennypacker: OK, maybe it shiat itself because it was sick. Shouldn't he take it down if its sick?

Or maybe it shat itself because Romney would make a bad President so that's why he put it back on the roof?

Do you have disassociative identity disorder or something?

why? because I find your attempts to find reasons why the dog shat itself aside from "dogs sometimes takes shiats" to be amusing?


No because your posts seem like 5 people have access to your login info
 
2012-01-13 11:29:28 AM

Death_Poot: If this is all they have to biatch about re: Romney,


Who said this is all they have to biatch about re: Romney? Did Rachel say "this is the only thing I can say negatively about Romney"? No? Then why make that assumption?
 
2012-01-13 11:31:02 AM

CPennypacker: skullkrusher: CPennypacker: skullkrusher: CPennypacker: OK, maybe it shiat itself because it was sick. Shouldn't he take it down if its sick?

Or maybe it shat itself because Romney would make a bad President so that's why he put it back on the roof?

Do you have disassociative identity disorder or something?

why? because I find your attempts to find reasons why the dog shat itself aside from "dogs sometimes takes shiats" to be amusing?

No because your posts seem like 5 people have access to your login info


no, they really don't. Pretty consistent, actually. So, you have no reason to believe that the dog was sick or scared aside from the fact that you really really really really want to believe the dog was sick or scared?
 
2012-01-13 11:32:33 AM
After reading the recent Vanity Fair expose on Mitt, he seems like a really, really, really strange dude. Ned Flanders without the warmth and humanity. He is definitely not someone "I would want to have a beer with" (putting aside the fact that he doesn't drink).
 
2012-01-13 11:32:35 AM

skullkrusher: CPennypacker: skullkrusher: CPennypacker: skullkrusher: CPennypacker: OK, maybe it shiat itself because it was sick. Shouldn't he take it down if its sick?

Or maybe it shat itself because Romney would make a bad President so that's why he put it back on the roof?

Do you have disassociative identity disorder or something?

why? because I find your attempts to find reasons why the dog shat itself aside from "dogs sometimes takes shiats" to be amusing?

No because your posts seem like 5 people have access to your login info

no, they really don't. Pretty consistent, actually. So, you have no reason to believe that the dog was sick or scared aside from the fact that you really really really really want to believe the dog was sick or scared?


No reason to believe it was sick or scared except it shiat itself you mean? Should it have asked Romney to take it down? Would you then believe it was unhappy?
 
2012-01-13 11:33:00 AM

cameroncrazy1984: If you're feeding them the right food, no dogs sometimes don't randomly take sh*ts. They're pretty regular.


how long was he on the roof for?
 
2012-01-13 11:33:39 AM
"It sounds kinda weird to me to be honest but I don't know if this is a common thing. He built a windshield apparently."

I know a couple who built a custom built cage on top of their motorcycle trailer so their two weenie dogs can travel with them. The dogs appear to love it. Haven't asked them, but they probably trained the dogs from puppies to be used to riding in this manner. For that reason, I probably wouldnt have done what Romney did as he apparently did not do this.

Saw another guy on TV (I think he was Nick Cage's brother) who trained his cat to ride in a windshield bag on his motorcycle as well (cat was secured with a leash so he couldnt jump out).
 
2012-01-13 11:34:30 AM

skullkrusher: cameroncrazy1984: If you're feeding them the right food, no dogs sometimes don't randomly take sh*ts. They're pretty regular.

how long was he on the roof for?


blogs.amctv.com

How can you be so obtuse? Is it deliberate?
 
2012-01-13 11:34:33 AM

skullkrusher: cameroncrazy1984: If you're feeding them the right food, no dogs sometimes don't randomly take sh*ts. They're pretty regular.

how long was he on the roof for?


That is a good question. How long is too long to keep a dog in an airtight cage so that he sh*ts himself?
 
2012-01-13 11:34:53 AM

CPennypacker: skullkrusher: CPennypacker: skullkrusher: CPennypacker: skullkrusher: CPennypacker: OK, maybe it shiat itself because it was sick. Shouldn't he take it down if its sick?

Or maybe it shat itself because Romney would make a bad President so that's why he put it back on the roof?

Do you have disassociative identity disorder or something?

why? because I find your attempts to find reasons why the dog shat itself aside from "dogs sometimes takes shiats" to be amusing?

No because your posts seem like 5 people have access to your login info

no, they really don't. Pretty consistent, actually. So, you have no reason to believe that the dog was sick or scared aside from the fact that you really really really really want to believe the dog was sick or scared?

No reason to believe it was sick or scared except it shiat itself you mean? Should it have asked Romney to take it down? Would you then believe it was unhappy?


and round and round we go
 
2012-01-13 11:34:59 AM

cameroncrazy1984: Death_Poot: If this is all they have to biatch about re: Romney,

Who said this is all they have to biatch about re: Romney? Did Rachel say "this is the only thing I can say negatively about Romney"? No? Then why make that assumption?


no, but I get tired of the "appealing to emotions" crap. Low hanging fruit. But, it may get a few to vote Democrat, so it's worth a shot I suppose........
 
2012-01-13 11:35:44 AM

cameroncrazy1984: skullkrusher: cameroncrazy1984: If you're feeding them the right food, no dogs sometimes don't randomly take sh*ts. They're pretty regular.

how long was he on the roof for?

That is a good question. How long is too long to keep a dog in an airtight cage so that he sh*ts himself?


maybe it was a special sort of cage which is airtight while not being dogshiat tight...
 
2012-01-13 11:35:47 AM

skullkrusher: CPennypacker: skullkrusher: CPennypacker: skullkrusher: CPennypacker: skullkrusher: CPennypacker: OK, maybe it shiat itself because it was sick. Shouldn't he take it down if its sick?

Or maybe it shat itself because Romney would make a bad President so that's why he put it back on the roof?

Do you have disassociative identity disorder or something?

why? because I find your attempts to find reasons why the dog shat itself aside from "dogs sometimes takes shiats" to be amusing?

No because your posts seem like 5 people have access to your login info

no, they really don't. Pretty consistent, actually. So, you have no reason to believe that the dog was sick or scared aside from the fact that you really really really really want to believe the dog was sick or scared?

No reason to believe it was sick or scared except it shiat itself you mean? Should it have asked Romney to take it down? Would you then believe it was unhappy?

and round and round we go


It's not my fault your argument is stupid and pointless.
 
2012-01-13 11:36:14 AM
What I want to know is why didn't they put the luggage on top the car and the dog inside?

If it's alive, it should be riding INSIDE the car is all I'm sayin'...

Did they not value their dog over their luggage?



/ Not a 'doggy' person, but this pisses me off...
 
2012-01-13 11:36:25 AM
Who the farking fark straps their dog on their roof? I've yet to ever see a dog carrier strapped to a roof. Yeah, no surprise the dog is shiatting itself in terror.
 
2012-01-13 11:37:05 AM

gimmegimme: skullkrusher: cameroncrazy1984: If you're feeding them the right food, no dogs sometimes don't randomly take sh*ts. They're pretty regular.

how long was he on the roof for?

[blogs.amctv.com image 560x332]

How can you be so obtuse? Is it deliberate?


will you elabradorate? Of course you won't. This is your schtick.
 
2012-01-13 11:38:38 AM

CPennypacker: skullkrusher: CPennypacker: skullkrusher: CPennypacker: skullkrusher: CPennypacker: skullkrusher: CPennypacker: OK, maybe it shiat itself because it was sick. Shouldn't he take it down if its sick?

Or maybe it shat itself because Romney would make a bad President so that's why he put it back on the roof?

Do you have disassociative identity disorder or something?

why? because I find your attempts to find reasons why the dog shat itself aside from "dogs sometimes takes shiats" to be amusing?

No because your posts seem like 5 people have access to your login info

no, they really don't. Pretty consistent, actually. So, you have no reason to believe that the dog was sick or scared aside from the fact that you really really really really want to believe the dog was sick or scared?

No reason to believe it was sick or scared except it shiat itself you mean? Should it have asked Romney to take it down? Would you then believe it was unhappy?

and round and round we go

It's not my fault your argument is stupid and pointless.


it is your fault that you are accepting Maddow's assertion of "shiatting itself in terror" without questioning it at all.

as for the argument being pointless... mocking you slavish farkwits might not pay will, but it still entertaining. That's the point.
 
2012-01-13 11:40:24 AM

skullkrusher: CPennypacker: skullkrusher: CPennypacker: skullkrusher: CPennypacker: skullkrusher: CPennypacker: skullkrusher: CPennypacker: OK, maybe it shiat itself because it was sick. Shouldn't he take it down if its sick?

Or maybe it shat itself because Romney would make a bad President so that's why he put it back on the roof?

Do you have disassociative identity disorder or something?

why? because I find your attempts to find reasons why the dog shat itself aside from "dogs sometimes takes shiats" to be amusing?

No because your posts seem like 5 people have access to your login info

no, they really don't. Pretty consistent, actually. So, you have no reason to believe that the dog was sick or scared aside from the fact that you really really really really want to believe the dog was sick or scared?

No reason to believe it was sick or scared except it shiat itself you mean? Should it have asked Romney to take it down? Would you then believe it was unhappy?

and round and round we go

It's not my fault your argument is stupid and pointless.

it is your fault that you are accepting Maddow's assertion of "shiatting itself in terror" without questioning it at all.

as for the argument being pointless... mocking you slavish farkwits might not pay will, but it still entertaining. That's the point.


Why did the dog shiat itself then? Have you ever had a dog? Dogs don't just shiat themselves.

Maddow can say whatever she wants. I have two dogs. They don't just randomly shiat themselves.

You look like a regular idiot and the only one entertained by your mocking is you.
 
2012-01-13 11:40:43 AM

skullkrusher: gimmegimme: skullkrusher: cameroncrazy1984: If you're feeding them the right food, no dogs sometimes don't randomly take sh*ts. They're pretty regular.

how long was he on the roof for?

[blogs.amctv.com image 560x332]

How can you be so obtuse? Is it deliberate?

will you elabradorate? Of course you won't. This is your schtick.


It's being pointed out to you that your argument somehow manages to be ignorant and circular at the same time. It's impossible to engage you in real discussion (see yesterday's discussion about Mitt Romney la Meheecahnoh), so I am pointing out that you are willfully putting up psychological barriers that block information from reaching you.
 
2012-01-13 11:41:11 AM

Death_Poot: "It sounds kinda weird to me to be honest but I don't know if this is a common thing. He built a windshield apparently."

I know a couple who built a custom built cage on top of their motorcycle trailer so their two weenie dogs can travel with them. The dogs appear to love it. Haven't asked them, but they probably trained the dogs from puppies to be used to riding in this manner. For that reason, I probably wouldnt have done what Romney did as he apparently did not do this.

Saw another guy on TV (I think he was Nick Cage's brother) who trained his cat to ride in a windshield bag on his motorcycle as well (cat was secured with a leash so he couldnt jump out).


I can maybe abide it on a motorcyle, if the pet can see it's owner and is calmed by their presence. But to strap the pet on top of the car roof isolated and alone without a clue as to what is going on, as opposed to putting the inanimate luggage on the roof? Putting aside whether it's deliberately cruel, it strikes me as really really really weird.
 
2012-01-13 11:43:16 AM

Diogenes: I thought all robots came with Asimov's Three Rules? Do they not extend to our canine friends?


This isn't one of those postitronic robots...they DO have the Three Laws as an integral part of their brains.
 
2012-01-13 11:43:49 AM
"Putting aside whether it's deliberately cruel, it strikes me as really really really weird."

I agree, but it won't affect whether or not I consider voting for him.
 
2012-01-13 11:43:59 AM
This is a bit interesting about Romney's father (who's political career is probably what launched mittens to do the same):

George W. (coincidence?) Romney
Romney entered politics by participating in a state constitutional convention to rewrite the Michigan Constitution during 1961-1962. He was elected Governor of Michigan in 1962 and was re-elected by increasingly large margins in 1964 and 1966. Romney worked to overhaul the state's financial and revenue structure, culminating in Michigan's first state income tax, and greatly expanded the size of state government.
 
2012-01-13 11:44:19 AM

Death_Poot: "Putting aside whether it's deliberately cruel, it strikes me as really really really weird."

I agree, but it won't affect whether or not I consider voting for him.


It will for a lot of people
 
2012-01-13 11:45:02 AM

CPennypacker: Why did the dog shiat itself then? Have you ever had a dog? Dogs don't just shiat themselves.


Who says the dog spontaneously shat itself? Maybe it had been up there for 5 hours and had to take a shiat? Dogs shiat several times a day, no? No, I haven't had a dog since I was very little. As I said earlier, don't know much about them. Did the dog shiat itself again in terror when it was put on the roof the second time?

CPennypacker: Maddow can say whatever she wants.


sure she can. So can I.

CPennypacker: You look like a regular idiot and the only one entertained by your mocking is you.


yeah... I entertain myself by mocking you. Was my post unclear?
 
2012-01-13 11:46:30 AM
Remember folks, in Fark Independent mysterio world direct actions have direct consequences and people should be held accountable ... unless it involves a Republican. Maybe the dog strapped to the roof was shiatting itself out of terror or maybe it was shiatting itself out of joy that it's getting the fun ride that 99.999% of family pets would never get from their owners. It's all so vague and nebulous and ambiguous, so let's not judge.
 
2012-01-13 11:46:47 AM

CPennypacker: I agree, but it won't affect whether or not I consider voting for him.


Which is precisely why Maddow mentioned it again. This issue is one of the things I hate about politics in general. Apples to Oranges............
 
2012-01-13 11:47:19 AM

skullkrusher: CPennypacker: Why did the dog shiat itself then? Have you ever had a dog? Dogs don't just shiat themselves.

Who says the dog spontaneously shat itself? Maybe it had been up there for 5 hours and had to take a shiat? Dogs shiat several times a day, no? No, I haven't had a dog since I was very little. As I said earlier, don't know much about them. Did the dog shiat itself again in terror when it was put on the roof the second time?

CPennypacker: Maddow can say whatever she wants.

sure she can. So can I.

CPennypacker: You look like a regular idiot and the only one entertained by your mocking is you.

yeah... I entertain myself by mocking you. Was my post unclear?


Dogs don't shiat in their crates. The dog would have to go so bad it was about to burst for it to shiat in its crate just because it had to shiat. Which is another problem.

Your post was pretty clear about you entertaining yourself. I was just pointing out that though you are entertaining yourself, everyone else here thinks you're a farkwit for it.
 
2012-01-13 11:47:58 AM

Karac: Truckers are the kind of people who think lap dances are better when the stripper is crying. Or that road head is better if you're also drinking a cartoon of milk with the girl's face on it.


I'm not a trucker and I think both of those things are hot. Is that wrong?
 
2012-01-13 11:48:51 AM

skullkrusher: CPennypacker: skullkrusher: CPennypacker: lennavan: It isnt often but I gotta disagree with Maddow on this one. Yeah, actually I do want a cold emotionless president making decisions, not someone who is going to make a stupid decision because he's following his/her emotions.

What's more, no, this story does not have legs. It actually sounded like a pretty reasonable thing to do, I'd venture the dog did not fit in the car and the family wanted to bring it with. It wasn't a cold calculated crisis management, he hosed the dog off. It's not like he just kept driving. Lots of reasons to attack Romney, this isn't one.

He hosed the dog off then he put him back in the crate and kept driving. He was wrong and so are you.

never been a fan of dogs and don't know much about them. If we're not upset about him putting the dog in the crate in the first place, why are we upset about him putting the dog back in the crate after cleaning him off?

Well, his argument was that the dog loved to go up there. So when the dog shiats itself in terror shouldn't that be a clue that maybe he doesn't like it so much?

sometimes dogs shiat themselves because they have to shiat, no? Who says it "shiat itself in terror"? Dr Rachel?


Since you admittedly know little about dogs, I'll clue you in.
shiat from a terrified animal is going to be quite different in consistency than a dogs regular bowel movement. A scared, distressed dog is going to be vile and squirty. Anyone who has owned a dog is familiar with the toilet habits of their animals. So chances are, Romney was well aware of the dogs distressed state and simply didn't care. Also, dogs that are used to being kenneled, as he claims this one was, will not shiat or piss in their boxes unless its a dire emergency....
 
2012-01-13 11:49:04 AM

gimmegimme: It's being pointed out to you that your argument somehow manages to be ignorant and circular at the same time.


those are not mutually exclusive things. I know you tried to sound smart in that sentence, but you failed really really badly.

gimmegimme: It's impossible to engage you in real discussion (see yesterday's discussion about Mitt Romney la Meheecahnoh), so I am pointing out that you are willfully putting up psychological barriers that block information from reaching you.


it is not impossible at all. See, the issue is the barriers you hold up. You read something on the internet. It was critical of Romney and said by Maddow. Ergo, you cannot question it. What I am doing is asking why do we assume the dog shiat in terror? Was the dog up there for hours? Maybe it had to go to the bathroom? If the dog had been up there for hours, why did it take so long for it to shiat itself in terror? Did it shiat itself in terror again after being returned to the carrier?

Putting the dog up there in the first place sounds strange to me but TFA focuses on what Romney did after the pooptastrophe.

As for yesterday's discussion, it wasn't about Romney being a Mexican. Nice lie though.
 
2012-01-13 11:49:27 AM
Walter Sobchek would never let this happen while Cynthia and Marty Ackerman were away for the weekend.

I say he marks Romney zero.

www.freedomsphoenix.com
 
2012-01-13 11:49:55 AM

EvilEgg: stpauler: Meh. Seriously, there doesn't need to be an increased lexicon for each candidate.

But if we must:

Huntsman: v To ignore party lines and work across aisles for the good of all...then get punished for it.

Perry: v. To shoot your load alone on a Saturday night

Gingrich: v. To cheat on your wife with an owl.

Obama: n. Self-contradictory evil.


I wouldn't say evil... I'd think I'd define it as:

Obama: v. To misrepresent oneself to voters by campaigning as a liberal when one is not
 
2012-01-13 11:50:15 AM

Psylence: Since you admittedly know little about dogs, I'll clue you in.
shiat from a terrified animal is going to be quite different in consistency than a dogs regular bowel movement. A scared, distressed dog is going to be vile and squirty. Anyone who has owned a dog is familiar with the toilet habits of their animals. So chances are, Romney was well aware of the dogs distressed state and simply didn't care. Also, dogs that are used to being kenneled, as he claims this one was, will not shiat or piss in their boxes unless its a dire emergency....


now see this is a clear and rational support for the assertion. Not so much to ask.
 
2012-01-13 11:51:18 AM

CPennypacker: Your post was pretty clear about you entertaining yourself. I was just pointing out that though you are entertaining yourself, everyone else here thinks you're a farkwit for it.


I know I am insulted when morons claim to speak for me. I'd imagine other people have the same pet peeve. You should be careful with that.
 
2012-01-13 11:51:43 AM

skullkrusher: gimmegimme: It's being pointed out to you that your argument somehow manages to be ignorant and circular at the same time.

those are not mutually exclusive things. I know you tried to sound smart in that sentence, but you failed really really badly.

gimmegimme: It's impossible to engage you in real discussion (see yesterday's discussion about Mitt Romney la Meheecahnoh), so I am pointing out that you are willfully putting up psychological barriers that block information from reaching you.

it is not impossible at all. See, the issue is the barriers you hold up. You read something on the internet. It was critical of Romney and said by Maddow. Ergo, you cannot question it. What I am doing is asking why do we assume the dog shiat in terror? Was the dog up there for hours? Maybe it had to go to the bathroom? If the dog had been up there for hours, why did it take so long for it to shiat itself in terror? Did it shiat itself in terror again after being returned to the carrier?

Putting the dog up there in the first place sounds strange to me but TFA focuses on what Romney did after the pooptastrophe.

As for yesterday's discussion, it wasn't about Romney being a Mexican. Nice lie though.


He never said it was about him BEING Mexican. It was bout Mitt the Mexican.

Did someone issue a memo about there being a moratorium on reading?
 
2012-01-13 11:51:55 AM

InmanRoshi: Remember folks, in Fark Independent mysterio world direct actions have direct consequences and people should be held accountable ... unless it involves a Republican. Maybe the dog strapped to the roof was shiatting itself out of terror or maybe it was shiatting itself out of joy that it's getting the fun ride that 99.999% of family pets would never get from their owners. It's all so vague and nebulous and ambiguous, so let's not judge.


Seriously! Let's focus on the fact that Fartbongo had the GALL to put Bo on the most recent White House Christmas card instead of traditional and religious signs of the season. (I'm not kidding. This is real: Link (new window) )

How about the accusation that the SeeKriT Muuslin is spending too much time shopping for his dog instead of working hard? (Not making this one up, either. Link (new window) )

Mitt values what is truly important instead of treating his animal like a little deity.
 
2012-01-13 11:52:41 AM

Psylence: Since you admittedly know little about dogs, I'll clue you in.
shiat from a terrified animal is going to be quite different in consistency than a dogs regular bowel movement. A scared, distressed dog is going to be vile and squirty. Anyone who has owned a dog is familiar with the toilet habits of their animals. So chances are, Romney was well aware of the dogs distressed state and simply didn't care. Also, dogs that are used to being kenneled, as he claims this one was, will not shiat or piss in their boxes unless its a dire emergency....


FTA: "emotion-free crisis management" LMFAO, you mean compassion free right?

Dogs don't love being sprayed down and then freezing their balls off being strapped to a roof on a trip to Canada, while they are simultaneously having an intestinal illness.

Mitts cruelty in this story seems to be consistent with the callous nature that he has conducted his career, destroying the lives of others for his own benefit.
 
2012-01-13 11:52:48 AM

coeyagi: He never said it was about him BEING Mexican. It was bout Mitt the Mexican.

Did someone issue a memo about there being a moratorium on reading?


that's some interesting and baseless word parsing there, chico
 
2012-01-13 11:54:18 AM

skullkrusher: CPennypacker: Your post was pretty clear about you entertaining yourself. I was just pointing out that though you are entertaining yourself, everyone else here thinks you're a farkwit for it.

I know I am insulted when morons claim to speak for me. I'd imagine other people have the same pet peeve. You should be careful with that.


Let me know when you actually find someone stupider than you so you can test out that pet peeve. I'm sure it'll be quite the search.
 
2012-01-13 11:54:29 AM

InmanRoshi: Remember folks, in Fark Independent mysterio world direct actions have direct consequences and people should be held accountable ... unless it involves a Republican. Maybe the dog strapped to the roof was shiatting itself out of terror or maybe it was shiatting itself out of joy that it's getting the fun ride that 99.999% of family pets would never get from their owners. It's all so vague and nebulous and ambiguous, so let's not judge.


it's really a matter of wanting proof for assertions and allegations. That's not much to ask, right? I mean, I understand that the feebleminded like to have their biases and beliefs supported and don't care much for the truth as long as the conversation confirms their preconceived notion of the matter but that's not how I roll.
 
2012-01-13 11:54:48 AM

skullkrusher: CPennypacker: Your post was pretty clear about you entertaining yourself. I was just pointing out that though you are entertaining yourself, everyone else here thinks you're a farkwit for it.

I know I am insulted when morons claim to speak for me. I'd imagine other people have the same pet peeve. You should be careful with that.


Nope, I agree with him. That's why I have you highlighted in gray, so that I can identify all the DERP early on. BTW, do you even have a job? I swear you post like 200 times a day.

... or is THIS your job?
 
2012-01-13 11:55:00 AM

skullkrusher: coeyagi: He never said it was about him BEING Mexican. It was bout Mitt the Mexican.

Did someone issue a memo about there being a moratorium on reading?

that's some interesting and baseless word parsing there, chico


He didn't say what the thread was about, he just said they were discussing Mitt the Mexican, leaving out the part that we discussed the label "hispanic" but not saying anything about him being Mexican.

I am sorry you are too much of a coward to admit you're wrong.
 
2012-01-13 11:55:33 AM
Karac:
road head is better if you're also drinking a cartoon of milk with the girl's face on it.

i2.kym-cdn.com
 
2012-01-13 11:55:54 AM

CPennypacker: skullkrusher: CPennypacker: Your post was pretty clear about you entertaining yourself. I was just pointing out that though you are entertaining yourself, everyone else here thinks you're a farkwit for it.

I know I am insulted when morons claim to speak for me. I'd imagine other people have the same pet peeve. You should be careful with that.

Let me know when you actually find someone stupider than you so you can test out that pet peeve. I'm sure it'll be quite the search.


who said that person has to be stupider than me? I just said "morons". Perhaps you should master reading before you try to insult people on what they wrote?
 
2012-01-13 11:55:59 AM

skullkrusher: InmanRoshi: Remember folks, in Fark Independent mysterio world direct actions have direct consequences and people should be held accountable ... unless it involves a Republican. Maybe the dog strapped to the roof was shiatting itself out of terror or maybe it was shiatting itself out of joy that it's getting the fun ride that 99.999% of family pets would never get from their owners. It's all so vague and nebulous and ambiguous, so let's not judge.

it's really a matter of wanting proof for assertions and allegations. That's not much to ask, right? I mean, I understand that the feebleminded like to have their biases and beliefs supported and don't care much for the truth as long as the conversation confirms their preconceived notion of the matter but that's not how I roll.


That's a pretty longwinded translation of "I suck GOP cawk".
 
2012-01-13 11:57:08 AM
So does anyone who's not a total jackass want to talk about this then?
 
2012-01-13 11:57:40 AM

coeyagi: He didn't say what the thread was about, he just said they were discussing Mitt the Mexican, leaving out the part that we discussed the label "hispanic" but not saying anything about him being Mexican.

I am sorry you are too much of a coward to admit you're wrong.


No one called Mitt a Mexican though. That's not what was it was about. I am sorry that you don't understand things good.
 
2012-01-13 11:58:15 AM

InmanRoshi: skullkrusher: InmanRoshi: Remember folks, in Fark Independent mysterio world direct actions have direct consequences and people should be held accountable ... unless it involves a Republican. Maybe the dog strapped to the roof was shiatting itself out of terror or maybe it was shiatting itself out of joy that it's getting the fun ride that 99.999% of family pets would never get from their owners. It's all so vague and nebulous and ambiguous, so let's not judge.

it's really a matter of wanting proof for assertions and allegations. That's not much to ask, right? I mean, I understand that the feebleminded like to have their biases and beliefs supported and don't care much for the truth as long as the conversation confirms their preconceived notion of the matter but that's not how I roll.

That's a pretty longwinded translation of "I suck GOP cawk".


you don't pay attention really well, do you?
 
2012-01-13 11:58:20 AM

Notabunny: BloodySaxon: Old-ass non stories rock!

It shows one of Romney's character traits. It shows what kind of man he is. That it happened years ago and defends it today shows he hasn't changed. It was a deeply cruel and creepy thing to do, and will make most Americas pause when they think of Romney.


Really? My family had issues with a dog shiatting himself in a crate anytime we had to go to the vet. OH THE HUMANITY!

This is goofy. There are better things to dig up on Romney.

Next you're going to tell me that venture capitalism is chaotic and therefore EVIL!
 
2012-01-13 11:59:13 AM

skullkrusher: CPennypacker: skullkrusher: CPennypacker: OK, maybe it shiat itself because it was sick. Shouldn't he take it down if its sick?

Or maybe it shat itself because Romney would make a bad President so that's why he put it back on the roof?

Do you have disassociative identity disorder or something?

why? because I find your attempts to find reasons why the dog shat itself aside from "dogs sometimes takes shiats" to be amusing?


Dogs don't normally shiat themselves. Whether it was in terror, due to sickness, or simply because of Romney's neglect in failing to pull over and walk the poor thing, something went terribly wrong there. And Romney's reaction was to just hose down the car and do it again.

This is how Romney treats his pets.
 
2012-01-13 11:59:23 AM

spiderpaz: skullkrusher: CPennypacker: Your post was pretty clear about you entertaining yourself. I was just pointing out that though you are entertaining yourself, everyone else here thinks you're a farkwit for it.

I know I am insulted when morons claim to speak for me. I'd imagine other people have the same pet peeve. You should be careful with that.

Nope, I agree with him. That's why I have you highlighted in gray, so that I can identify all the DERP early on. BTW, do you even have a job? I swear you post like 200 times a day.

... or is THIS your job?


yeah, THIS is my job. I am one of those people you farking morons believe exist. People who are paid to post on Fark.
 
2012-01-13 11:59:33 AM

skullkrusher: Who says the dog spontaneously shat itself? Maybe it had been up there for 5 hours and had to take a shiat? Dogs shiat several times a day, no? No, I haven't had a dog since I was very little.


Dogs can hold it extremely well. When I picked up my dog, it was a two day road trip. She held it the whole way, despite constant breaks to try to get her to go...turned out she's just picky, and as soon as we got home she recognized it as such and went. The only time dogs can't hold it are when they're abused (and lose their instinct to not shiat where they sleep), when they're sick, when they're scared (and even then, they'll only shiat when they already have to shiat, otherwise it's more musky grossness than feces), or when they get old and have bowel problems.
 
2012-01-13 11:59:42 AM

BloodySaxon: Notabunny: BloodySaxon: Old-ass non stories rock!

It shows one of Romney's character traits. It shows what kind of man he is. That it happened years ago and defends it today shows he hasn't changed. It was a deeply cruel and creepy thing to do, and will make most Americas pause when they think of Romney.

Really? My family had issues with a dog shiatting himself in a crate anytime we had to go to the vet. OH THE HUMANITY!

This is goofy. There are better things to dig up on Romney.

Next you're going to tell me that venture capitalism is chaotic and therefore EVIL!


Was the crate strapped to the roof of your car while you and your family reached highway speeds?
 
2012-01-13 12:00:09 PM

HeartBurnKid: skullkrusher: CPennypacker: skullkrusher: CPennypacker: OK, maybe it shiat itself because it was sick. Shouldn't he take it down if its sick?

Or maybe it shat itself because Romney would make a bad President so that's why he put it back on the roof?

Do you have disassociative identity disorder or something?

why? because I find your attempts to find reasons why the dog shat itself aside from "dogs sometimes takes shiats" to be amusing?

Dogs don't normally shiat themselves. Whether it was in terror, due to sickness, or simply because of Romney's neglect in failing to pull over and walk the poor thing, something went terribly wrong there. And Romney's reaction was to just hose down the car and do it again.

This is how Romney treats his pets.


hey look! It's a respectable lefty with interesting opinions who can discuss shiat honestly! Take notes, farkwits.

I'll cede the point.
 
2012-01-13 12:00:35 PM

skullkrusher: InmanRoshi: skullkrusher: InmanRoshi: Remember folks, in Fark Independent mysterio world direct actions have direct consequences and people should be held accountable ... unless it involves a Republican. Maybe the dog strapped to the roof was shiatting itself out of terror or maybe it was shiatting itself out of joy that it's getting the fun ride that 99.999% of family pets would never get from their owners. It's all so vague and nebulous and ambiguous, so let's not judge.

it's really a matter of wanting proof for assertions and allegations. That's not much to ask, right? I mean, I understand that the feebleminded like to have their biases and beliefs supported and don't care much for the truth as long as the conversation confirms their preconceived notion of the matter but that's not how I roll.

That's a pretty longwinded translation of "I suck GOP cawk".

you don't pay attention really well, do you?


I think he nailed it. You used to occasionally have a point, but lately you've gone full GOPtard.
 
2012-01-13 12:00:45 PM
so... now what do we talk about?
 
2012-01-13 12:03:49 PM

skullkrusher: so... now what do we talk about?


The proper use of the Shift key.
 
2012-01-13 12:04:11 PM

BloodySaxon: Notabunny: BloodySaxon: Old-ass non stories rock!

It shows one of Romney's character traits. It shows what kind of man he is. That it happened years ago and defends it today shows he hasn't changed. It was a deeply cruel and creepy thing to do, and will make most Americas pause when they think of Romney.

Really? My family had issues with a dog shiatting himself in a crate anytime we had to go to the vet. OH THE HUMANITY!

This is goofy. There are better things to dig up on Romney.

Next you're going to tell me that venture capitalism is chaotic and therefore EVIL!


Your dog rode on the roof of your car in freeway-speed winds for 12 hours on the way to the vet? You should look into vets a little closer to home.
 
2012-01-13 12:06:15 PM

skullkrusher: CPennypacker: skullkrusher: CPennypacker: Your post was pretty clear about you entertaining yourself. I was just pointing out that though you are entertaining yourself, everyone else here thinks you're a farkwit for it.

I know I am insulted when morons claim to speak for me. I'd imagine other people have the same pet peeve. You should be careful with that.

Let me know when you actually find someone stupider than you so you can test out that pet peeve. I'm sure it'll be quite the search.

who said that person has to be stupider than me? I just said "morons". Perhaps you should master reading before you try to insult people on what they wrote?


Because, even a moron is probably smarter than you? We finally agree on something!
 
2012-01-13 12:07:41 PM

skullkrusher: sometimes dogs shiat themselves because they have to shiat, no? Who says it "shiat itself in terror"? Dr Rachel?


I can't believe it took that long to ask a "critical thinking" question. My god, do people just accept the words of others without thinking on them?

Dogs shiat. Doesn't mean they're sick. My dog has some pretty friggin' splattery shiats sometimes when I simply give him a can of dog food.

Keep a dog in a cage without properly pooping him (i.e., take out for hour walk...all he does is piss...five minutes home and he shiats in the house) can cause a mess regardless. Dog had a wind screen to protect from cold air after the hosing....I really, really, really don't see how this is a problem.
 
2012-01-13 12:08:58 PM

HeartBurnKid: skullkrusher: InmanRoshi: skullkrusher: InmanRoshi: Remember folks, in Fark Independent mysterio world direct actions have direct consequences and people should be held accountable ... unless it involves a Republican. Maybe the dog strapped to the roof was shiatting itself out of terror or maybe it was shiatting itself out of joy that it's getting the fun ride that 99.999% of family pets would never get from their owners. It's all so vague and nebulous and ambiguous, so let's not judge.

it's really a matter of wanting proof for assertions and allegations. That's not much to ask, right? I mean, I understand that the feebleminded like to have their biases and beliefs supported and don't care much for the truth as long as the conversation confirms their preconceived notion of the matter but that's not how I roll.

That's a pretty longwinded translation of "I suck GOP cawk".

you don't pay attention really well, do you?

I think he nailed it. You used to occasionally have a point, but lately you've gone full GOPtard.


et tu man? Sheeit.

I never, not once, EVER voice support for the majority of GOP positions. Everything from their opinions on the economy to their social conservatism to their foreign policy beliefs are almost always horseshiat. Quite literally, with very few exceptions. To me this is blatantly obvious and I assume it is blatantly obvious to everyone but a handful of true believers - most of whom I imagine are trolls. As a result, I don't find it terribly interesting to talk about the obvious ad naseum. There is rarely a serious GOP poster who is defending a position so the thread just because the same tedious crap of Democratic ninnies decrying the comment or action X over and over and over again. What I do find interesting, however, is the meta argument. People often call this pedantry... maybe it sometimes is. However, it should not be mistaken for support of the opposition. Romney is a farkwit. I would much rather see Barack Obama as President again than any of the Republican frontrunners. However, his farkwititude does not automatically make everything said against him true or valid. This is such an example. Some people with experience with dogs have explained that this reaction seems to have been one of terror for X, Y and Z reason. As a result, I have ceded the meta argument. Plus, I just really really like to argue and with 90% of all posts seeming from the Democratic side, ya gotta take the contrary to get something going :)

No, that is not an admission of trolling. Arguing the argument is not the same thing

That explain it?

I know people reading this will tomorrow say again that I am a shill or whatever. That's fine. At least then we'll know who the liars are.
 
2012-01-13 12:09:07 PM

WhoGAS: My dog has some pretty friggin' splattery shiats sometimes when I simply give him a can of dog food.


Give him some kibble too, then. That dog needs fiber.
 
2012-01-13 12:09:49 PM

skullkrusher: HeartBurnKid: skullkrusher: InmanRoshi: skullkrusher: InmanRoshi: Remember folks, in Fark Independent mysterio world direct actions have direct consequences and people should be held accountable ... unless it involves a Republican. Maybe the dog strapped to the roof was shiatting itself out of terror or maybe it was shiatting itself out of joy that it's getting the fun ride that 99.999% of family pets would never get from their owners. It's all so vague and nebulous and ambiguous, so let's not judge.

it's really a matter of wanting proof for assertions and allegations. That's not much to ask, right? I mean, I understand that the feebleminded like to have their biases and beliefs supported and don't care much for the truth as long as the conversation confirms their preconceived notion of the matter but that's not how I roll.

That's a pretty longwinded translation of "I suck GOP cawk".

you don't pay attention really well, do you?

I think he nailed it. You used to occasionally have a point, but lately you've gone full GOPtard.

et tu man? Sheeit.

I never, not once, EVER voice support for the majority of GOP positions. Everything from their opinions on the economy to their social conservatism to their foreign policy beliefs are almost always horseshiat. Quite literally, with very few exceptions. To me this is blatantly obvious and I assume it is blatantly obvious to everyone but a handful of true believers - most of whom I imagine are trolls. As a result, I don't find it terribly interesting to talk about the obvious ad naseum. There is rarely a serious GOP poster who is defending a position so the thread just because the same tedious crap of Democratic ninnies decrying the comment or action X over and over and over again. What I do find interesting, however, is the meta argument. People often call this pedantry... maybe it sometimes is. However, it should not be mistaken for support of the opposition. Romney is a farkwit. I would much rather ...


tl;dr. :p
 
2012-01-13 12:11:39 PM

CPennypacker: He hosed the dog off then he put him back in the crate and kept driving. He was wrong and so are you.


He definitely should have left the dog in a crate on the side of the road hlfway to Canada.
 
2012-01-13 12:11:46 PM

HeartBurnKid: skullkrusher: HeartBurnKid: skullkrusher: InmanRoshi: skullkrusher: InmanRoshi: Remember folks, in Fark Independent mysterio world direct actions have direct consequences and people should be held accountable ... unless it involves a Republican. Maybe the dog strapped to the roof was shiatting itself out of terror or maybe it was shiatting itself out of joy that it's getting the fun ride that 99.999% of family pets would never get from their owners. It's all so vague and nebulous and ambiguous, so let's not judge.

it's really a matter of wanting proof for assertions and allegations. That's not much to ask, right? I mean, I understand that the feebleminded like to have their biases and beliefs supported and don't care much for the truth as long as the conversation confirms their preconceived notion of the matter but that's not how I roll.

That's a pretty longwinded translation of "I suck GOP cawk".

you don't pay attention really well, do you?

I think he nailed it. You used to occasionally have a point, but lately you've gone full GOPtard.

et tu man? Sheeit.

I never, not once, EVER voice support for the majority of GOP positions. Everything from their opinions on the economy to their social conservatism to their foreign policy beliefs are almost always horseshiat. Quite literally, with very few exceptions. To me this is blatantly obvious and I assume it is blatantly obvious to everyone but a handful of true believers - most of whom I imagine are trolls. As a result, I don't find it terribly interesting to talk about the obvious ad naseum. There is rarely a serious GOP poster who is defending a position so the thread just because the same tedious crap of Democratic ninnies decrying the comment or action X over and over and over again. What I do find interesting, however, is the meta argument. People often call this pedantry... maybe it sometimes is. However, it should not be mistaken for support of the opposition. Romney is a farkwit. I woul ...


hehe cocksucker
 
2012-01-13 12:12:39 PM

BloodySaxon: CPennypacker: He hosed the dog off then he put him back in the crate and kept driving. He was wrong and so are you.

He definitely should have left the dog in a crate on the side of the road hlfway to Canada.


No, he should have brought it into the car
 
2012-01-13 12:19:34 PM

CPennypacker: skullkrusher: CPennypacker: Your post was pretty clear about you entertaining yourself. I was just pointing out that though you are entertaining yourself, everyone else here thinks you're a farkwit for it.

I know I am insulted when morons claim to speak for me. I'd imagine other people have the same pet peeve. You should be careful with that.

Let me know when you actually find someone stupider than you so you can test out that pet peeve. I'm sure it'll be quite the search.


You don't even realize that you're very clearly the retard here, do you CP? That's plenty of amusement all by itself. Your "points" are intellectually bankrupt, just like this whole "controversy." This has been a chuckle in MA since the last presidential cycle.
 
2012-01-13 12:20:33 PM

Death_Poot: "Putting aside whether it's deliberately cruel, it strikes me as really really really weird."

I agree, but it won't affect whether or not I consider voting for him.


It would for me. I mean, I wouldn't vote for Mitt anyway, but this sort of thing definitely falls into the tiebreaker category.
 
2012-01-13 12:22:29 PM

BloodySaxon: CPennypacker: skullkrusher: CPennypacker: Your post was pretty clear about you entertaining yourself. I was just pointing out that though you are entertaining yourself, everyone else here thinks you're a farkwit for it.

I know I am insulted when morons claim to speak for me. I'd imagine other people have the same pet peeve. You should be careful with that.

Let me know when you actually find someone stupider than you so you can test out that pet peeve. I'm sure it'll be quite the search.

You don't even realize that you're very clearly the retard here, do you CP? That's plenty of amusement all by itself. Your "points" are intellectually bankrupt, just like this whole "controversy." This has been a chuckle in MA since the last presidential cycle.


Seriously. Just like those Sarah McLachlan commercials. Those are a riot!
 
2012-01-13 12:22:32 PM

BloodySaxon: CPennypacker: skullkrusher: CPennypacker: Your post was pretty clear about you entertaining yourself. I was just pointing out that though you are entertaining yourself, everyone else here thinks you're a farkwit for it.

I know I am insulted when morons claim to speak for me. I'd imagine other people have the same pet peeve. You should be careful with that.

Let me know when you actually find someone stupider than you so you can test out that pet peeve. I'm sure it'll be quite the search.

You don't even realize that you're very clearly the retard here, do you CP? That's plenty of amusement all by itself. Your "points" are intellectually bankrupt, just like this whole "controversy." This has been a chuckle in MA since the last presidential cycle.


Maybe to jackasses like you, but I don't really care if you think I'm the retard here considering where its coming from.

Which of my points are intellectually bankrupt? I said the dog shiat itself in terror. I was told dogs shiat themselves for other reasons. I asserted that none of the reasons given made it OK and the dog shiatting itself was still a sign to take it down.

I don't really care what Rachel Maddow says. I'm not enraged as a rabid lefty. I'm enraged as a dog lover.
 
2012-01-13 12:28:45 PM

CPennypacker: BloodySaxon: CPennypacker: skullkrusher: CPennypacker: Your post was pretty clear about you entertaining yourself. I was just pointing out that though you are entertaining yourself, everyone else here thinks you're a farkwit for it.

I know I am insulted when morons claim to speak for me. I'd imagine other people have the same pet peeve. You should be careful with that.

Let me know when you actually find someone stupider than you so you can test out that pet peeve. I'm sure it'll be quite the search.

You don't even realize that you're very clearly the retard here, do you CP? That's plenty of amusement all by itself. Your "points" are intellectually bankrupt, just like this whole "controversy." This has been a chuckle in MA since the last presidential cycle.

Maybe to jackasses like you, but I don't really care if you think I'm the retard here considering where its coming from.

Which of my points are intellectually bankrupt? I said the dog shiat itself in terror. I was told dogs shiat themselves for other reasons. I asserted that none of the reasons given made it OK and the dog shiatting itself was still a sign to take it down.

I don't really care what Rachel Maddow says. I'm not enraged as a rabid lefty. I'm enraged as a dog lover.


As long as blind emotion is involved. Phew!

I too love dogs (and even cats) and I don't have to revert to a 9 year old pet obsessed girl everytime I notice discomfort in the animal kingdom.
 
2012-01-13 12:31:15 PM

BloodySaxon: I too love dogs (and even cats) and I don't have to revert to a 9 year old pet obsessed girl everytime I notice discomfort in the animal kingdom.


It's your pet. If you don't treat it like family, then you shouldn't have a pet.
 
2012-01-13 12:31:59 PM
I've always wondered why municipalities feel it's necessary to make those "don't shake your baby" PSAs. Now I know why.
 
2012-01-13 12:32:05 PM

BloodySaxon: CPennypacker: BloodySaxon: CPennypacker: skullkrusher: CPennypacker: Your post was pretty clear about you entertaining yourself. I was just pointing out that though you are entertaining yourself, everyone else here thinks you're a farkwit for it.

I know I am insulted when morons claim to speak for me. I'd imagine other people have the same pet peeve. You should be careful with that.

Let me know when you actually find someone stupider than you so you can test out that pet peeve. I'm sure it'll be quite the search.

You don't even realize that you're very clearly the retard here, do you CP? That's plenty of amusement all by itself. Your "points" are intellectually bankrupt, just like this whole "controversy." This has been a chuckle in MA since the last presidential cycle.

Maybe to jackasses like you, but I don't really care if you think I'm the retard here considering where its coming from.

Which of my points are intellectually bankrupt? I said the dog shiat itself in terror. I was told dogs shiat themselves for other reasons. I asserted that none of the reasons given made it OK and the dog shiatting itself was still a sign to take it down.

I don't really care what Rachel Maddow says. I'm not enraged as a rabid lefty. I'm enraged as a dog lover.

As long as blind emotion is involved. Phew!

I too love dogs (and even cats) and I don't have to revert to a 9 year old pet obsessed girl everytime I notice discomfort in the animal kingdom.


You love dogs? Would you strap your dog in its crate to the roof of your car for a 12 hour highway drive? If the dog shiat itself, would you pull over, hose down the dog throw it back into its cage and keep driving?

Honestly?
 
2012-01-13 12:33:04 PM

BloodySaxon:

Next you're going to tell me that venture capitalism is chaotic and therefore EVIL!


More Chaotic Neutral.

\badummtsshh
 
2012-01-13 12:34:46 PM

CPennypacker: BloodySaxon: CPennypacker: BloodySaxon: CPennypacker: skullkrusher: CPennypacker: Your post was pretty clear about you entertaining yourself. I was just pointing out that though you are entertaining yourself, everyone else here thinks you're a farkwit for it.

I know I am insulted when morons claim to speak for me. I'd imagine other people have the same pet peeve. You should be careful with that.

Let me know when you actually find someone stupider than you so you can test out that pet peeve. I'm sure it'll be quite the search.

You don't even realize that you're very clearly the retard here, do you CP? That's plenty of amusement all by itself. Your "points" are intellectually bankrupt, just like this whole "controversy." This has been a chuckle in MA since the last presidential cycle.

Maybe to jackasses like you, but I don't really care if you think I'm the retard here considering where its coming from.

Which of my points are intellectually bankrupt? I said the dog shiat itself in terror. I was told dogs shiat themselves for other reasons. I asserted that none of the reasons given made it OK and the dog shiatting itself was still a sign to take it down.

I don't really care what Rachel Maddow says. I'm not enraged as a rabid lefty. I'm enraged as a dog lover.

As long as blind emotion is involved. Phew!

I too love dogs (and even cats) and I don't have to revert to a 9 year old pet obsessed girl everytime I notice discomfort in the animal kingdom.

You love dogs? Would you strap your dog in its crate to the roof of your car for a 12 hour highway drive? If the dog shiat itself, would you pull over, hose down the dog throw it back into its cage and keep driving?

Honestly?


What Romney did was illegal. There was a MA law against it at the time (not sure if there is now, but I would imagine so.)

If this is no big deal...why is it illegal?
 
2012-01-13 12:38:03 PM

thismomentinblackhistory:
Honestly?

What Romney did was illegal. There was a MA law against it at the time (not sure if there is now, but I would imagine so.)

If this is no big deal...why is it illegal?


Ooh, I got this one. Because of hippie environmentalist wackos who want to kill business.
 
2012-01-13 12:44:10 PM

BloodySaxon: I too love dogs


If you don't see the problem with what Romney did, you don't love dogs as much as you think you do.
 
2012-01-13 12:48:12 PM

HeartBurnKid: BloodySaxon: I too love dogs

If you don't see the problem with what Romney did, you don't love dogs as much as you think you do.


Or he doesn't know what love is. Romney sounds more and more like a sociopath.

"...a pervasive pattern of disregard for, and violation of, the rights of others that begins in childhood or early adolescence and continues into adulthood."

Corporations are people.
I like to fire people.
We're not stopping this car!
 
2012-01-13 12:50:08 PM

Le Bomb Suprize: Ricardo Klement: CPennypacker: Did you guys see that interview? Hilarious. He was trying to say that the dog was safe from the wind because he was in an airtight crate. Am I the only one who sees the problem with putting a dog in an airtight crate?

No. I was wondering why none of the pundits noticed. I think Romney said it was airtight to debunk the notion that feces could have escaped, but forgot that something has to get in.

I think he meant that it was wind proof in that the dog was not getting blasted by 75 mph winds. His explanation that the dog loved to ride up there doesn't work though. A 15 minute ride to the park is not quite the same as a 8-10 hour road trip. And the fact that he hosed the obviously distressed dog off and put him right back up there shows he lacks any empathy.

Although it's that calmness and ability to easily withstand others pain that made him a success at Bain, so I guess he has that going for him.


www.bizcardpro.com
Look at the subtle offwhite coloring. The tasteful hotness of the link. Oh god. It even has a watermark.

/GOP Candidate matchup based on American Psycho characters, go go.
 
2012-01-13 12:51:21 PM

madcan34: Well at least Rachel Maddow is reporting on an important story and not just pushing a liberal agenda..


1. She's not a reporter; she's a pundit. It's in her job description.

2. She actually uses facts, instead of making them up, like your favorite pundits do.
 
2012-01-13 12:53:09 PM
So, Mitt is an uber wealthy, ultra vanilla republican who lacks any discernible degree of compassion or empathy.

/And this surprises people why?
 
2012-01-13 12:54:33 PM
Romney n. The frothy mixture of fecal matter that splatters your windshield because the asshole in front of you is driving around with a petrified dog tied to his roof.
 
2012-01-13 01:05:34 PM
rom-ney (v). 1. to defecate in terror

Good. I was getting tired of 'san-tor-um (n) 1. That frothy mixture of lube and fecal matter that is sometimes the by-product of anal sex' anyway.
 
2012-01-13 01:12:26 PM

stpauler: Gingrich: v. To cheat on your wife with an owl.


Who ?
 
2012-01-13 01:13:03 PM

stpauler: Gingrich: v. To cheat on your wife with an owl.


I really think this one could catch on.
 
2012-01-13 01:18:40 PM
Romney: n A selfish, uncompassionate person

/obvious
 
2012-01-13 01:19:30 PM

sweetmelissa31: stpauler: Gingrich: v. To cheat on your wife with an owl.

I really think this one could catch on.


"We're just friends!"

www.washingtonpost.com
 
2012-01-13 01:20:07 PM

madcan34: Well at least Rachel Maddow is reporting on an important story and not just pushing a liberal agenda..


You've never met a 'dog person'. They can hate people for doing something in a movie against an animal, let alone in real life. To them this story is a BIG DEAL.

Of course most dog persons I know that would vote conservative treat their dogs as utility animals vs. family animals (some, not all) and wouldn't think that big of a deal. Dog probably didn't shiat in fear, just more the fact that it was stuck in a box for hours would be the rationalization.

Me, I'm no fan of dogs and in the 80s when I was a kid we'd sit in the back of a truck free to fly out at highway speeds so this isn't too far of a stretch.

Though, Mitt Griswold has a nice ring to it.
 
2012-01-13 01:24:10 PM
tboucher
That your parents either didn't care or treated you worse than most people treat their dogs doesn't make "dog people" the problem here
 
2012-01-13 01:33:07 PM

Nina_Hartley's_Ass: sweetmelissa31: stpauler: Gingrich: v. To cheat on your wife with an owl.

I really think this one could catch on.

"We're just friends!"

[www.washingtonpost.com image 606x403]


She looks good in that pic. Must be in her younger years.
 
2012-01-13 01:52:02 PM

gimmegimme: skullkrusher: gimmegimme: skullkrusher: cameroncrazy1984: If you're feeding them the right food, no dogs sometimes don't randomly take sh*ts. They're pretty regular.

how long was he on the roof for?

[blogs.amctv.com image 560x332]

How can you be so obtuse? Is it deliberate?

will you elabradorate? Of course you won't. This is your schtick.

It's being pointed out to you that your argument somehow manages to be ignorant and circular at the same time. It's impossible to engage you in real discussion (see yesterday's discussion about Mitt Romney la Meheecahnoh), so I am pointing out that you are willfully putting up psychological barriers that block information from reaching you.


No. He's not. He's farking with you. All he's ever doing is farking with you.
 
2012-01-13 02:03:48 PM

Duke Phillips' Singing Bears: No. He's not. He's farking with you. All he's ever doing is farking with you.


I wouldn't say always
 
2012-01-13 02:07:21 PM

historycat: Romney sounds more and more like a sociopath.


Well, he was a finance exec.
 
2012-01-13 02:10:24 PM

Duke Phillips' Singing Bears: gimmegimme: skullkrusher: gimmegimme: skullkrusher: cameroncrazy1984: If you're feeding them the right food, no dogs sometimes don't randomly take sh*ts. They're pretty regular.

how long was he on the roof for?

[blogs.amctv.com image 560x332]

How can you be so obtuse? Is it deliberate?

will you elabradorate? Of course you won't. This is your schtick.

It's being pointed out to you that your argument somehow manages to be ignorant and circular at the same time. It's impossible to engage you in real discussion (see yesterday's discussion about Mitt Romney la Meheecahnoh), so I am pointing out that you are willfully putting up psychological barriers that block information from reaching you.

No. He's not. He's farking with you. All he's ever doing is farking with you.


It depends on who's logged in
 
2012-01-13 02:10:26 PM

CPennypacker: lennavan: It isnt often but I gotta disagree with Maddow on this one. Yeah, actually I do want a cold emotionless president making decisions, not someone who is going to make a stupid decision because he's following his/her emotions.

What's more, no, this story does not have legs. It actually sounded like a pretty reasonable thing to do, I'd venture the dog did not fit in the car and the family wanted to bring it with. It wasn't a cold calculated crisis management, he hosed the dog off. It's not like he just kept driving. Lots of reasons to attack Romney, this isn't one.

He hosed the dog off then he put him back in the crate and kept driving. He was wrong and so are you.


Which is nicer than ignoring the dog and continuing on driving, right?
 
2012-01-13 02:12:31 PM

CPennypacker: Duke Phillips' Singing Bears: gimmegimme: skullkrusher: gimmegimme: skullkrusher: cameroncrazy1984: If you're feeding them the right food, no dogs sometimes don't randomly take sh*ts. They're pretty regular.

how long was he on the roof for?

[blogs.amctv.com image 560x332]

How can you be so obtuse? Is it deliberate?

will you elabradorate? Of course you won't. This is your schtick.

It's being pointed out to you that your argument somehow manages to be ignorant and circular at the same time. It's impossible to engage you in real discussion (see yesterday's discussion about Mitt Romney la Meheecahnoh), so I am pointing out that you are willfully putting up psychological barriers that block information from reaching you.

No. He's not. He's farking with you. All he's ever doing is farking with you.

It depends on who's logged in


yeah, keep repeating it. It will eventually become funny and/or true but probably not both... though maybe.
 
2012-01-13 02:12:52 PM

lennavan: CPennypacker: lennavan: It isnt often but I gotta disagree with Maddow on this one. Yeah, actually I do want a cold emotionless president making decisions, not someone who is going to make a stupid decision because he's following his/her emotions.

What's more, no, this story does not have legs. It actually sounded like a pretty reasonable thing to do, I'd venture the dog did not fit in the car and the family wanted to bring it with. It wasn't a cold calculated crisis management, he hosed the dog off. It's not like he just kept driving. Lots of reasons to attack Romney, this isn't one.

He hosed the dog off then he put him back in the crate and kept driving. He was wrong and so are you.

Which is nicer than ignoring the dog and continuing on driving, right?


Its nicer then pulling over and blowing the dog's brains out too. What's your point?
 
2012-01-13 02:13:03 PM

CPennypacker: Duke Phillips' Singing Bears: gimmegimme: skullkrusher: gimmegimme: skullkrusher: cameroncrazy1984: If you're feeding them the right food, no dogs sometimes don't randomly take sh*ts. They're pretty regular.

how long was he on the roof for?

[blogs.amctv.com image 560x332]

How can you be so obtuse? Is it deliberate?

will you elabradorate? Of course you won't. This is your schtick.

It's being pointed out to you that your argument somehow manages to be ignorant and circular at the same time. It's impossible to engage you in real discussion (see yesterday's discussion about Mitt Romney la Meheecahnoh), so I am pointing out that you are willfully putting up psychological barriers that block information from reaching you.

No. He's not. He's farking with you. All he's ever doing is farking with you.

It depends on who's logged in


Hey. Unfortunately, I'm me. Always. I take a very hard line on alts because those folks are not interested in sharing ideas in an honest manner.
 
2012-01-13 02:17:19 PM

HeartBurnKid: WhoGAS: My dog has some pretty friggin' splattery shiats sometimes when I simply give him a can of dog food.

Give him some kibble too, then. That dog needs fiber.


Yeah. he's normally on solids but I give him a can every now and then when he's been especially good on a jog or a walk. He's half Australian Shepherd, half black lab so he loves to herd me when I jog or loves people so much that he tries to run right at them, tackle them and love them to death. Those are the two behaviors I'm trying to break right now. He's only four months old but has shown he's a lot smarter than I expected him to be.

Point being (just so it doesn't seem like I'm meaning to threadjack; I'm not but an exchange of ideas and suggestions should never be turned down IMO) is that dogs poop; sometimes liquidy. :o)
 
2012-01-13 02:23:14 PM

madcan34: Well at least Rachel Maddow is reporting on an important story and not just pushing a liberal agenda..


It's an important story for what it reveals about the GOP front runner's character. It's not even just what Romney did, it's his total lack of emotion in dealing with the situation. He's weirdly incapable of empathy. That in turn suggests underlying personality disturbance.

Or, to put it in terms even Republican primary voters can understand:

WEIRDO ROMNEY DON'T LUV HIS DOG, THEN WEIRDO ROMNEY DON'T LUV PERIOD.
 
2012-01-13 02:24:24 PM

CPennypacker: skullkrusher: CPennypacker: lennavan: It isnt often but I gotta disagree with Maddow on this one. Yeah, actually I do want a cold emotionless president making decisions, not someone who is going to make a stupid decision because he's following his/her emotions.

What's more, no, this story does not have legs. It actually sounded like a pretty reasonable thing to do, I'd venture the dog did not fit in the car and the family wanted to bring it with. It wasn't a cold calculated crisis management, he hosed the dog off. It's not like he just kept driving. Lots of reasons to attack Romney, this isn't one.

He hosed the dog off then he put him back in the crate and kept driving. He was wrong and so are you.

never been a fan of dogs and don't know much about them. If we're not upset about him putting the dog in the crate in the first place, why are we upset about him putting the dog back in the crate after cleaning him off?

Well, his argument was that the dog loved to go up there. So when the dog shiats itself in terror shouldn't that be a clue that maybe he doesn't like it so much?


I don't actually remember saying the dog loved going up there. Perhaps you can highlight where I said that. Bold/Underline work great.

I said it was reasonable. My wife's cat hates the car carrier, first time in he peed himself, presumably in terror. Should I stop taking the cat to the vet? The cat does not love the carrier and I thought using the carrier anyway was a reasonable thing to do. But apparently you are the authority figure here and if the animal doesn't absolutely love it, it must be wrong or something.
 
2012-01-13 02:25:00 PM

CPennypacker: Which is nicer than ignoring the dog and continuing on driving, right?

Its nicer then pulling over and blowing the dog's brains out too. What's your point?


The article was about how Romney was emotionless. You just agreed Romney a nice thing. Whoa.
 
2012-01-13 02:27:29 PM

lennavan: I don't actually remember saying the dog loved going up there. Perhaps you can highlight where I said that. Bold/Underline work great.

I said it was reasonable. My wife's cat hates the car carrier, first time in he peed himself, presumably in terror. Should I stop taking the cat to the vet? The cat does not love the carrier and I thought using the carrier anyway was a reasonable thing to do. But apparently you are the authority figure here and if the animal doesn't absolutely love it, it must be wrong or something.


No that was Romney's argument
 
2012-01-13 02:28:46 PM

lennavan: CPennypacker: Which is nicer than ignoring the dog and continuing on driving, right?

Its nicer then pulling over and blowing the dog's brains out too. What's your point?

The article was about how Romney was emotionless. You just agreed Romney a nice thing. Whoa.


No. I was illustrating that just because you can think of worse things he could have done, it doesn't mean that what he did wasn't terrible.
 
2012-01-13 02:30:11 PM

Psylence: Since you admittedly know little about dogs, I'll clue you in.
shiat from a terrified animal is going to be quite different in consistency than a dogs regular bowel movement. A scared, distressed dog is going to be vile and squirty. Anyone who has owned a dog is familiar with the toilet habits of their animals. So chances are, Romney was well aware of the dogs distressed state and simply didn't care. Also, dogs that are used to being kenneled, as he claims this one was, will not shiat or piss in their boxes unless its a dire emergency....


So you seem to know nothing about traveling, I'll clue you in. Anyone who has ever traveled anywhere is well aware that sometimes you do the best you can in a situation. While ideally yes, once noticing the dog shiat himself, Romney would have magically teleported his dog safely home, in reality on a road trip that might not be so possible as magic teleporters do not exist yet.

I get you want to be upset with Romney and you're willing to put all the effort required in order to score some points here. So let me help you out there. Take issue with putting him on top of the car in the first place. That's where you can say he farked up. But once he realized the dog shiat himself, what was he going to do?

1) Magically teleport the dog home
2) Tell the dog to suck it up and continue on?

These are the choices I would have seen on the road. Romney, being the emotionless bastard that he is, actually found an opportunity to clean the dog off before continuing so he wouldn't have to stay up there covered in his own shiat. Putting the dog up there in the first place may have been stupid. Hosing the dog off was actually a nice thing to do.
 
2012-01-13 02:32:09 PM

lennavan: Psylence: Since you admittedly know little about dogs, I'll clue you in.
shiat from a terrified animal is going to be quite different in consistency than a dogs regular bowel movement. A scared, distressed dog is going to be vile and squirty. Anyone who has owned a dog is familiar with the toilet habits of their animals. So chances are, Romney was well aware of the dogs distressed state and simply didn't care. Also, dogs that are used to being kenneled, as he claims this one was, will not shiat or piss in their boxes unless its a dire emergency....

So you seem to know nothing about traveling, I'll clue you in. Anyone who has ever traveled anywhere is well aware that sometimes you do the best you can in a situation. While ideally yes, once noticing the dog shiat himself, Romney would have magically teleported his dog safely home, in reality on a road trip that might not be so possible as magic teleporters do not exist yet.

I get you want to be upset with Romney and you're willing to put all the effort required in order to score some points here. So let me help you out there. Take issue with putting him on top of the car in the first place. That's where you can say he farked up. But once he realized the dog shiat himself, what was he going to do?

1) Magically teleport the dog home
2) Tell the dog to suck it up and continue on?

These are the choices I would have seen on the road. Romney, being the emotionless bastard that he is, actually found an opportunity to clean the dog off before continuing so he wouldn't have to stay up there covered in his own shiat. Putting the dog up there in the first place may have been stupid. Hosing the dog off was actually a nice thing to do.


So what you're saying is that Romney is a poor planner, he doesn't understand the real-world effects of his decisions and his compromises are half-assed and unsatisfactory. I agree!
 
2012-01-13 02:32:11 PM

CPennypacker: lennavan: CPennypacker: Which is nicer than ignoring the dog and continuing on driving, right?

Its nicer then pulling over and blowing the dog's brains out too. What's your point?

The article was about how Romney was emotionless. You just agreed Romney a nice thing. Whoa.

No. I was illustrating that just because you can think of worse things he could have done, it doesn't mean that what he did wasn't terrible.


Well sure but I brought up a possibility another reasonable person might do, that is continue on down the road and take care of it when you get there. You just pulled some irrelevant B.S. example out of your ass for comparison to score internet points.

So there's always that.
 
2012-01-13 02:32:13 PM

lennavan: Psylence: Since you admittedly know little about dogs, I'll clue you in.
shiat from a terrified animal is going to be quite different in consistency than a dogs regular bowel movement. A scared, distressed dog is going to be vile and squirty. Anyone who has owned a dog is familiar with the toilet habits of their animals. So chances are, Romney was well aware of the dogs distressed state and simply didn't care. Also, dogs that are used to being kenneled, as he claims this one was, will not shiat or piss in their boxes unless its a dire emergency....

So you seem to know nothing about traveling, I'll clue you in. Anyone who has ever traveled anywhere is well aware that sometimes you do the best you can in a situation. While ideally yes, once noticing the dog shiat himself, Romney would have magically teleported his dog safely home, in reality on a road trip that might not be so possible as magic teleporters do not exist yet.

I get you want to be upset with Romney and you're willing to put all the effort required in order to score some points here. So let me help you out there. Take issue with putting him on top of the car in the first place. That's where you can say he farked up. But once he realized the dog shiat himself, what was he going to do?

1) Magically teleport the dog home
2) Tell the dog to suck it up and continue on?

These are the choices I would have seen on the road. Romney, being the emotionless bastard that he is, actually found an opportunity to clean the dog off before continuing so he wouldn't have to stay up there covered in his own shiat. Putting the dog up there in the first place may have been stupid. Hosing the dog off was actually a nice thing to do.


3) Put the dog in the car instead of back in his crate on the roof?
 
2012-01-13 02:32:57 PM

CPennypacker: 3) Put the dog in the car instead of back in his crate on the roof?


Was there room for the dog in the car?
 
2012-01-13 02:33:38 PM

lennavan: CPennypacker: 3) Put the dog in the car instead of back in his crate on the roof?

Was there room for the dog in the car?


A human being would make room
 
2012-01-13 02:34:17 PM

lennavan: CPennypacker: lennavan: CPennypacker: Which is nicer than ignoring the dog and continuing on driving, right?

Its nicer then pulling over and blowing the dog's brains out too. What's your point?

The article was about how Romney was emotionless. You just agreed Romney a nice thing. Whoa.

No. I was illustrating that just because you can think of worse things he could have done, it doesn't mean that what he did wasn't terrible.

Well sure but I brought up a possibility another reasonable person might do, that is continue on down the road and take care of it when you get there. You just pulled some irrelevant B.S. example out of your ass for comparison to score internet points.

So there's always that.


Actually, it was to show that your logical conclusion was bad. I'll take the internet points though.
 
2012-01-13 02:35:27 PM

CPennypacker: lennavan: CPennypacker: 3) Put the dog in the car instead of back in his crate on the roof?

Was there room for the dog in the car?

A human being would make room


especially if that human being were a wizard
 
2012-01-13 02:36:17 PM

lennavan: Psylence: Since you admittedly know little about dogs, I'll clue you in.
shiat from a terrified animal is going to be quite different in consistency than a dogs regular bowel movement. A scared, distressed dog is going to be vile and squirty. Anyone who has owned a dog is familiar with the toilet habits of their animals. So chances are, Romney was well aware of the dogs distressed state and simply didn't care. Also, dogs that are used to being kenneled, as he claims this one was, will not shiat or piss in their boxes unless its a dire emergency....

So you seem to know nothing about traveling, I'll clue you in. Anyone who has ever traveled anywhere is well aware that sometimes you do the best you can in a situation. While ideally yes, once noticing the dog shiat himself, Romney would have magically teleported his dog safely home, in reality on a road trip that might not be so possible as magic teleporters do not exist yet.

I get you want to be upset with Romney and you're willing to put all the effort required in order to score some points here. So let me help you out there. Take issue with putting him on top of the car in the first place. That's where you can say he farked up. But once he realized the dog shiat himself, what was he going to do?

1) Magically teleport the dog home
2) Tell the dog to suck it up and continue on?

These are the choices I would have seen on the road. Romney, being the emotionless bastard that he is, actually found an opportunity to clean the dog off before continuing so he wouldn't have to stay up there covered in his own shiat. Putting the dog up there in the first place may have been stupid. Hosing the dog off was actually a nice thing to do.


Partially misses the point. Most people get upset when their dog is sick, because they love their dog. Romney didn't.
 
2012-01-13 02:38:34 PM

gimmegimme: So what you're saying is that Romney is a poor planner, he doesn't understand the real-world effects of his decisions and his compromises are half-assed and unsatisfactory. I agree!


Now you're onto something. If the media would go with something solid like you mention, it'd be more real. As it is, the MSM only cares about emotional pleas because they know that most of the voting populace couldn't care less about real issues.
 
2012-01-13 02:38:43 PM

skullkrusher: CPennypacker: lennavan: CPennypacker: 3) Put the dog in the car instead of back in his crate on the roof?

Was there room for the dog in the car?

A human being would make room

especially if that human being were a wizard


Lap?
 
2012-01-13 02:39:21 PM

CPennypacker: lennavan: CPennypacker: 3) Put the dog in the car instead of back in his crate on the roof?

Was there room for the dog in the car?

A human being would make room


2 points:
1) Irish Setters are not exactly lap dogs so it's possible that it could have been an impossibility.
2) If it isn't possible DON'T TAKE YOUR DOG ON A TWELVE HOUR DRIVE. Kennel it.

/Not a pet owner, but that seems like the common sense thing to me.
 
2012-01-13 02:42:48 PM

BeesNuts: CPennypacker: lennavan: CPennypacker: 3) Put the dog in the car instead of back in his crate on the roof?

Was there room for the dog in the car?

A human being would make room

2 points:
1) Irish Setters are not exactly lap dogs so it's possible that it could have been an impossibility.
2) If it isn't possible DON'T TAKE YOUR DOG ON A TWELVE HOUR DRIVE. Kennel it.

/Not a pet owner, but that seems like the common sense thing to me.


And there are other things he could have done to at least ameliorate the situation. How taking a break from the road to give the dog a little time to recover?
 
2012-01-13 02:51:42 PM

CPennypacker: lennavan: CPennypacker: 3) Put the dog in the car instead of back in his crate on the roof?

Was there room for the dog in the car?

A human being would make room


So you have no idea. Cool.

bugontherug: Partially misses the point. Most people get upset when their dog is sick, because they love their dog. Romney didn't.


Romney didn't get upset when his dog was sick. Even if that is true, which you don't actually know, who gives a fark? From that, you make the incorrect leap to therefore that means he does not love his dog. Not everyone gets upset so easily, not everyone cries at girlie movies. Crying is what happens when you can't handle the situation. What Romney did was better than being upset, Romney actually did something about it.

It seems you all would prefer to have a president making decisions based on emotions rather than facts and logic. It's farking scary. You all promised not to forget the lessons of 9/11. Wasn't one lesson we should probably relax and cool the fark off before engaging in major military conflicts? You want our next president to make that decision while upset?

Ridiculous.
 
2012-01-13 02:54:02 PM

lennavan: CPennypacker: lennavan: CPennypacker: 3) Put the dog in the car instead of back in his crate on the roof?

Was there room for the dog in the car?

A human being would make room

So you have no idea. Cool.

bugontherug: Partially misses the point. Most people get upset when their dog is sick, because they love their dog. Romney didn't.

Romney didn't get upset when his dog was sick. Even if that is true, which you don't actually know, who gives a fark? From that, you make the incorrect leap to therefore that means he does not love his dog. Not everyone gets upset so easily, not everyone cries at girlie movies. Crying is what happens when you can't handle the situation. What Romney did was better than being upset, Romney actually did something about it.
It seems you all would prefer to have a president making decisions based on emotions rather than facts and logic. It's farking scary. You all promised not to forget the lessons of 9/11. Wasn't one lesson we should probably relax and cool the fark off before engaging in major military conflicts? You want our next president to make that decision while upset?

Ridiculous.


When in doubt, break the law. Cool. I'm calling you if I ever need representation.
 
2012-01-13 02:55:19 PM

bugontherug: And there are other things he could have done to at least ameliorate the situation. How taking a break from the road to give the dog a little time to recover?


Who's to say he didn't?

Here:

"I went to the store and then went to bed."

Although one can assume that I went to bed immediately after the store trip, it's not a given. Why would a writer not fill in the gaps between the two actions? Possibly because it's nothing the author though the reader would want to see, contained unnecessary details to the story, etc. Heck, the author here may have purposefully left out the "Hosed him down then the family went inside to do some shopping for food/snacks, used the bathroom themselves and, after a couple of hours, finally continued their trip."

Those details would only come out if there was a person telling the story who knew ahead of time that this would become a talking point in a presidential campaign.

Like I mentioned, however, the other person brought up the only salient points from this: lack of compassion, etc. But even then, does that show a history of behavior or was a dad just so tired from driving 12 hours that he just wanted to get home?

Have you ever been so exhausted? Have you ever done something out of anger? Do you want that one single moment to be the defining moment of your life?

I'm just saying, I can't judge the man no matter how much of a freak I think he is. I'm no better than him, you or anyone else and I don't have the facts or intentions of all their actions to tell him he's an ass or not.
 
2012-01-13 02:57:10 PM

gimmegimme: lennavan: CPennypacker: lennavan: CPennypacker: 3) Put the dog in the car instead of back in his crate on the roof?

Was there room for the dog in the car?

A human being would make room

So you have no idea. Cool.

bugontherug: Partially misses the point. Most people get upset when their dog is sick, because they love their dog. Romney didn't.

Romney didn't get upset when his dog was sick. Even if that is true, which you don't actually know, who gives a fark? From that, you make the incorrect leap to therefore that means he does not love his dog. Not everyone gets upset so easily, not everyone cries at girlie movies. Crying is what happens when you can't handle the situation. What Romney did was better than being upset, Romney actually did something about it.
It seems you all would prefer to have a president making decisions based on emotions rather than facts and logic. It's farking scary. You all promised not to forget the lessons of 9/11. Wasn't one lesson we should probably relax and cool the fark off before engaging in major military conflicts? You want our next president to make that decision while upset?

Ridiculous.

When in doubt, break the law. Cool. I'm calling you if I ever need representation.


Hosing down your dog is against the law? Yikes.
 
2012-01-13 02:58:50 PM
Can we get skullcrusher back in here? It actually got stupider after he left. At least he was arguing about why the dog shiat and not trying to give Romney a medal for not abandoning the dog on the side of the road.
 
2012-01-13 03:04:53 PM

lennavan: Romney didn't get upset when his dog was sick. Even if that is true, which you don't actually know, who gives a fark? From that, you make the incorrect leap to therefore that means he does not love his dog. Not everyone gets upset so easily, not everyone cries at girlie movies. Crying is what happens when you can't handle the situation. What Romney did was better than being upset, Romney actually did something about it.


I didn't say anything about "crying." The story praises Romney for "emotion free crisis management." Normal people would have empathized with the dog a little, and tried to make some accommodation to make him more comfortable. In addition to his poor planning, this story bothers people because the lack of emotion in his response to his pet's illness is just kind of weird.
 
2012-01-13 03:04:54 PM

CPennypacker: Can we get skullcrusher back in here? It actually got stupider after he left. At least he was arguing about why the dog shiat and not trying to give Romney a medal for not abandoning the dog on the side of the road.


I know, right? Would you believe how many people think building a custom windshield so your dog can come with on the family vacation and then hours later after realizing it was a bad idea and the dog was upset you make a special stop to clean him up is an example of Romney hating the dog? The partisan hackery here is truly astounding.
 
2012-01-13 03:13:02 PM

WhoGAS: bugontherug: And there are other things he could have done to at least ameliorate the situation. How taking a break from the road to give the dog a little time to recover?

Who's to say he didn't?

Here:

"I went to the store and then went to bed."

Although one can assume that I went to bed immediately after the store trip, it's not a given. Why would a writer not fill in the gaps between the two actions? Possibly because it's nothing the author though the reader would want to see, contained unnecessary details to the story, etc. Heck, the author here may have purposefully left out the "Hosed him down then the family went inside to do some shopping for food/snacks, used the bathroom themselves and, after a couple of hours, finally continued their trip."

Those details would only come out if there was a person telling the story who knew ahead of time that this would become a talking point in a presidential campaign.

Like I mentioned, however, the other person brought up the only salient points from this: lack of compassion, etc. But even then, does that show a history of behavior or was a dad just so tired from driving 12 hours that he just wanted to get home?

Have you ever been so exhausted? Have you ever done something out of anger? Do you want that one single moment to be the defining moment of your life?

I'm just saying, I can't judge the man no matter how much of a freak I think he is. I'm no better than him, you or anyone else and I don't have the facts or intentions of all their actions to tell him he's an ass or not.


The article describes his handling of the situation as "emotion free." He wasn't angry, or upset. He was "emotion free."

"Emotion free" is an admirable trait when you're deciding how many people to unemploy to pay for your million dollar consulting fee. "Emotion free" is less admirable when dealing with people or things you care about. Romney as president might treat the American people in the same emotion free manner he treats workers he's laying off, and the family dog when he's sick.

Conservatives might find that character trait admirable, so it's surprising Gingrich is making it an issue. It just makes normal people a little uncomfortable is all.
 
2012-01-13 03:15:05 PM

bugontherug: "Emotion free" is an admirable trait when you're deciding how many people to unemploy to pay for your million dollar consulting fee. "Emotion free" is less admirable when dealing with people or things you purportedly care about. Romney as president might treat the American people in the same emotion free manner he treats workers he's laying off, and the family dog when he's sick.


FTFM.
 
2012-01-13 03:15:06 PM

bugontherug: The story praises Romney for "emotion free crisis management."


It sure does.

bugontherug: Normal people would have empathized with the dog a little


I agree. Maybe even thought about putting the dog in the car until they realized the story says "was overstuffed with suitcases." So what would he do?

bugontherug: tried to make some accommodation to make him more comfortable


Such as cleaning the dog off? Or building a custom windshield?

bugontherug: this story bothers people because the lack of emotion in his response to his pet's illness is just kind of weird.


This story does indeed point out a lack of emotion. Did you even bother asking why you believe there was a lack of emotion in the story? Did you even bother questioning its reliability?

"Sometime during a 12-hour drive from Boston to Canada in 1983"

1983. The story was written what, 24 years later? So at best, it's a story recounting how he acted 24 years ago. How accurate are the details?

After all, the first version of the story I'd heard from the family friend-who hadn't been an eyewitness-improbably had Mitt driving the station wagon right through a carwash

He heard it from a friend who wasn't there and the friend said Mitt went through a carwash to clean the dog. That seems reliable? And look, he has a pre-drawn narrative:

it's always struck me as a valuable window into how Romney operates. In everything the guy does, he functions on logic, not emotion.

By the way, the things people used to do back in 1983 was a bit different than now. Context is relevant.
 
2012-01-13 03:18:09 PM

lennavan: bugontherug: The story praises Romney for "emotion free crisis management."

It sure does.

bugontherug: Normal people would have empathized with the dog a little

I agree. Maybe even thought about putting the dog in the car until they realized the story says "was overstuffed with suitcases." So what would he do?

bugontherug: tried to make some accommodation to make him more comfortable

Such as cleaning the dog off? Or building a custom windshield?

bugontherug: this story bothers people because the lack of emotion in his response to his pet's illness is just kind of weird.

This story does indeed point out a lack of emotion. Did you even bother asking why you believe there was a lack of emotion in the story? Did you even bother questioning its reliability?

"Sometime during a 12-hour drive from Boston to Canada in 1983"

1983. The story was written what, 24 years later? So at best, it's a story recounting how he acted 24 years ago. How accurate are the details?

After all, the first version of the story I'd heard from the family friend-who hadn't been an eyewitness-improbably had Mitt driving the station wagon right through a carwash

He heard it from a friend who wasn't there and the friend said Mitt went through a carwash to clean the dog. That seems reliable? And look, he has a pre-drawn narrative:

it's always struck me as a valuable window into how Romney operates. In everything the guy does, he functions on logic, not emotion.

By the way, the things people used to do back in 1983 was a bit different than now. Context is relevant.


I guess it doesn't matter to you then that it was illegal for him to strap the dog up there in the first place.

If you want to give him th eplus for making the "logical" decision to hose down the dog and put it back up there, you still have to deal with his "logical" decision to put the dog up there in the first place.
 
2012-01-13 03:28:38 PM

CPennypacker: I guess it doesn't matter to you then that it was illegal for him to strap the dog up there in the first place.


Was it? I forget where it was established that in 1983 this was a cruel way to transport dogs. But no, to be quite honest whether or not something is illegal doesn't matter to me when determining right or wrong. There's a correlation but it's not perfect.

I got no beef with pot smokers, I think they are good people.

CPennypacker: you still have to deal with his "logical" decision to put the dog up there in the first place.


I think that was a stupid idea in the first place. I also think I have the benefit of hindsight and a 2012 context so it's fully possible to think it was a reasonable thing to do back then.
 
2012-01-13 03:28:46 PM

lennavan: Did you even bother asking why you believe there was a lack of emotion in the story?


I did not. Though now that you raise the question, it could be because the story said he was emotion free.


I agree. Maybe even thought about putting the dog in the car until they realized the story says "was overstuffed with suitcases." So what would he do?


Tie the suitcases on the roof, and let the dog ride in the car. Take a long break. Pet the dog a little, and say in a silly voice "is my precious puppy sick?" Anything. There were options available to him. Putting the dog on the roof in the first place was just kind of weird. His lack of emotion in dealing with the situation is weirder still.


Such as cleaning the dog off? Or building a custom windshield?


The story leads me to believe he did those things not out of empathy, but out of utility.

Did you even bother questioning its reliability?

Yes. The story is praising Romney highly. So the author's bias is in favor of Romney, not against him. It's only by reading between the lines that the story is a little weird.


He heard it from a friend who wasn't there and the friend said Mitt went through a carwash to clean the dog.


I'm sorry, but the perception that a candidate doesn't love his pet dog is probably fatal to a presidential campaign. It is now being used against him by his own party in South Carolina, and with good reason. If the Romney campaign found fault with the story, it would have disputed it by now. It's been public at least five years:

Link (new window)

The author's pro-Romney bias, and Romney's lack of protest before now give rise to the inference that the story is credible.
 
2012-01-13 03:31:49 PM

lennavan: CPennypacker: I guess it doesn't matter to you then that it was illegal for him to strap the dog up there in the first place.

Was it? I forget where it was established that in 1983 this was a cruel way to transport dogs. But no, to be quite honest whether or not something is illegal doesn't matter to me when determining right or wrong. There's a correlation but it's not perfect.

I got no beef with pot smokers, I think they are good people.

CPennypacker: you still have to deal with his "logical" decision to put the dog up there in the first place.

I think that was a stupid idea in the first place. I also think I have the benefit of hindsight and a 2012 context so it's fully possible to think it was a reasonable thing to do back then.


Back then? It was 1983 not ancient egypt.
 
2012-01-13 03:34:34 PM

bugontherug: I did not. Though now that you raise the question, it could be because the story said he was emotion free.


Do you believe everything you read on the internet as established truth?

bugontherug: His lack of emotion in dealing with the situation is weirder still.


Was there a lack of emotion?

bugontherug: The story leads me


Funny, in reading the follow-up, that's exactly what the author wanted you to get out of the story. I wonder how that worked out.

bugontherug: Yes. The story is praising Romney highly. So the author's bias is in favor of Romney, not against him. It's only by reading between the lines that the story is a little weird.


This is just completely false. From the author himself - "Seeking to penetrate the stock image of the air-brushed family."

bugontherug: The author's pro-Romney bias, and Romney's lack of protest before now give rise to the inference that the story is credible.


Brutal. Just brutal. Not only are you wrong but you just absolutely know you're right, making it impossible to see how wrong you are. I can't help you man. You've already built a false narrative to help you support your ill conceived conclusions. I cannot argue against the things you've fabricated to support your beliefs.
 
2012-01-13 03:36:51 PM

CPennypacker: Back then? It was 1983 not ancient egypt.


Yes, the only relevant past time point is ancient egypt. Nothing in between is relevant at all. We went from all being ancient egyptians to suddenly we all have laws and regulations regarding safe transport of people and animals. Laws never change, except when you compare now to ancient egypt that is.
 
2012-01-13 03:45:16 PM

bugontherug: He heard it from a friend who wasn't there and the friend said Mitt went through a carwash to clean the dog.

I'm sorry, but the perception that a candidate doesn't love his pet dog is probably fatal to a presidential campaign. It is now being used against him by his own party in South Carolina, and with good reason. If the Romney campaign found fault with the story, it would have disputed it by now. It's been public at least five years:


Wait. He went through a CAR wash to wash the dog? I thought he used a hose, like you would if you needed to clean an owl.

i103.photobucket.com
 
2012-01-13 03:56:38 PM
One of the things to look for in a sociopath or a Psychopath is how they treat animals. It is a clear indication of how they want to treat people.
 
2012-01-13 03:57:01 PM

lennavan: bugontherug: I did not. Though now that you raise the question, it could be because the story said he was emotion free.

Do you believe everything you read on the internet as established truth?

bugontherug: His lack of emotion in dealing with the situation is weirder still.

Was there a lack of emotion?

bugontherug: The story leads me

Funny, in reading the follow-up, that's exactly what the author wanted you to get out of the story. I wonder how that worked out.

bugontherug: Yes. The story is praising Romney highly. So the author's bias is in favor of Romney, not against him. It's only by reading between the lines that the story is a little weird.

This is just completely false. From the author himself - "Seeking to penetrate the stock image of the air-brushed family."

bugontherug: The author's pro-Romney bias, and Romney's lack of protest before now give rise to the inference that the story is credible.

Brutal. Just brutal. Not only are you wrong but you just absolutely know you're right, making it impossible to see how wrong you are. I can't help you man. You've already built a false narrative to help you support your ill conceived conclusions. I cannot argue against the things you've fabricated to support your beliefs.


U gettin' mad bro? U sound mad.

The article speaks glowingly of Romney, and a journalist who wanted to write a positive story could just as easily say his or her aim is to "penetrate the image of the air brushed family," because he or she wants to make the subject seem more human. The article which is the subject of this thread is pro-Romney in tone, trying to characterize him as an effective crisis-manager. You have to read between the lines to see that it suggests an underlying personality disturbance.


Do you believe everything you read on the internet as established truth?


No. You asked why I believed there was a "lack of emotion in the story." I answered the question you asked, not the one you imagine you asked.

Was there a lack of emotion?

The credible evidence says yes. In fact, the story was confirmed by the Romney family, and the version the journalist published is the Romney family's own positive spin.

"For the record, neither Tagg nor any other Romney was my original source for the anecdote. Collins and others have pushed this silly line to suggest how tone-deaf the Romney brood must be. In fact, I went to the then 37-year-old Tagg only after having heard the Seamus story at the very end of a long interview with a close friend of the Romney family. Seeking to penetrate the stock image of the air-brushed family, I had asked that friend what stories the Romneys reminisced about in the privacy of their own home. As soon as the Seamus road trip anecdote passed his lips, I knew it was a gem. But I was determined to avoid a situation where Romney's handlers could call into question the anecdote - or the entire article - because I had gotten some small detail wrong. So I insisted that Tagg poll his mother and brothers and persisted until I had confirmed every last fact. Far from being tone-deaf, Tagg realized as I dug deeper that the story could cause his father grief. Yet Tagg's participation actually helped his dad. After all, the first version of the story I'd heard from the family friend - who hadn't been an eyewitness - improbably had Mitt driving the station wagon right through a carwash. Imagine the howls from PETA if Seamus had been introduced to the world with the image of high-pressure wraparound brushes pummeling a defenseless, diarrheal dog."

Link (new window)

Brutal. Just brutal. Not only are you wrong but you just absolutely know you're right, making it impossible to see how wrong you are. I can't help you man. You've already built a false narrative to help you support your ill conceived conclusions. I cannot argue against the things you've fabricated to support your beliefs.

It's good to see that your argument is so strong that you've decided to focus your attack on me. I am right, because all the objective evidence shows that this story was pro-Romney spin of an ugly event revealing more about the man's capacity for empathy than the family wanted revealed. That you are the kind of shady person who, when shown to be wrong, sinks to personal attacks in place of syllogisms does nothing to strengthen or undermine that case.
 
2012-01-13 03:59:19 PM

Satanic_Hamster: bugontherug: He heard it from a friend who wasn't there and the friend said Mitt went through a carwash to clean the dog.

I'm sorry, but the perception that a candidate doesn't love his pet dog is probably fatal to a presidential campaign. It is now being used against him by his own party in South Carolina, and with good reason. If the Romney campaign found fault with the story, it would have disputed it by now. It's been public at least five years:

Wait. He went through a CAR wash to wash the dog? I thought he used a hose, like you would if you needed to clean an owl


The exaggerated story says he went through a car wash. The Romney family's own story says he hosed the dog off.
 
2012-01-13 04:02:18 PM

lennavan: CPennypacker: Back then? It was 1983 not ancient egypt.

Yes, the only relevant past time point is ancient egypt. Nothing in between is relevant at all. We went from all being ancient egyptians to suddenly we all have laws and regulations regarding safe transport of people and animals. Laws never change, except when you compare now to ancient egypt that is.


You're absolutely right. I'm sure back in the golden days of 1983, in Massachusets, it was all the rage to strap your dog's crate to the roof of your station wagon, throw him in, and drive up and down the interstate. They probably had clubs. Life was much simpler back then.
 
2012-01-13 04:27:53 PM

skullkrusher: coeyagi: He didn't say what the thread was about, he just said they were discussing Mitt the Mexican, leaving out the part that we discussed the label "hispanic" but not saying anything about him being Mexican.

I am sorry you are too much of a coward to admit you're wrong.

No one called Mitt a Mexican though. That's not what was it was about. I am sorry that you don't understand things good.


Facepalm. He was born in Mexico. It doesn't matter if he was called that or not. Jesus, you can admit anytime now, sweetheart.
 
2012-01-13 04:29:16 PM

coeyagi: skullkrusher: coeyagi: He didn't say what the thread was about, he just said they were discussing Mitt the Mexican, leaving out the part that we discussed the label "hispanic" but not saying anything about him being Mexican.

I am sorry you are too much of a coward to admit you're wrong.

No one called Mitt a Mexican though. That's not what was it was about. I am sorry that you don't understand things good.

Facepalm. He was born in Mexico. It doesn't matter if he was called that or not. Jesus, you can admit anytime now, sweetheart.


Sorry, I meant to say he was descended from Mexicans.
 
2012-01-13 04:31:52 PM

coeyagi: He was born in Mexico.


coeyagi: Sorry, I meant to say he was descended from Mexicans.


Sekrit messican mormon?

/if he'd just cough up his birth certificate, this wouldn't be an issue.
 
2012-01-13 04:43:19 PM

lennavan: Putting the dog up there in the first place may have been stupid. Hosing the dog off was actually a nice thing to do.


Except now the dog is wet, which means its going to be freezing.

I could almost buy Mitt's argument that the dog loved being in the carrier, and accept that the dog didn't shiat itself out of fear but rather because it had to go really bad. But even if I accept those possibilities, this story still makes Mitt look like a total ass:

First, he knew the trip would be twelve hours and apparently made no provision for bathroom breaks for the dog. That's ridiculous. I've taken my dog on long road trips where we spent twelve to twenty hours on the road each day. I scheduled regular stops (every three to four hours) to let the dog out to use the bathroom and spend twenty minutes playing fetch so she could stretch her legs. My dog has never crapped inside my car.

Second, once the dog had crapped itself Mitt should have been able to recognize the dog was in distress. But let's be generous and assume the dog wasn't actually in any serious discomfort and readily agree to get back in the crate. Romney still put a wet dog in a box on top of a car and then drove for several more hours (which means he's driving into the evening) in a Northern state and then in Canada, which means that even if it was summer it would still be fairly cold. The wind chill alone is going to be very high, since he is presumably driving between 55 and 75 mph.

These are facts that remain true even if we take Mitt completely at his word and assume the best possibilities. He's still a guy who would make no plans for his dog's bathroom business on a twelve hour drive, and he's still a guy who would put a wet dog on top of a car on a long drive into Canada.

/Also, unless the dog had some sort of general incontinence issue or wasn't allowed to defecate for many hours before being put in the crate, it should have been able to hold it for twelve hours. A dog the size on an Irish Setter should be able to hold it for about 24 hours if properly crate-trained. One shouldn't force a dog to hold it that long, but the dog should be able to handle it. For that reason, and the liquid nature of its defecation, I strongly suspect that Seamus shiat himself in terror.
 
2012-01-13 04:44:11 PM

skullkrusher: yeah... I entertain myself by mocking you. Was my post unclear?


well, that's incredibly sad. I entertain myself by spending time in the company of friends, reading books, going to movies, things like that.

I know you try to paint yourself as some sort of dispassionate independent, but it's hard not to think of you as a staunch republican when, like many others on the right, you derive pleasure from pissing off "the libs".
 
2012-01-13 04:46:26 PM

coeyagi: coeyagi: skullkrusher: coeyagi: He didn't say what the thread was about, he just said they were discussing Mitt the Mexican, leaving out the part that we discussed the label "hispanic" but not saying anything about him being Mexican.

I am sorry you are too much of a coward to admit you're wrong.

No one called Mitt a Mexican though. That's not what was it was about. I am sorry that you don't understand things good.

Facepalm. He was born in Mexico. It doesn't matter if he was called that or not. Jesus, you can admit anytime now, sweetheart.

Sorry, I meant to say he was descended from Mexicans.


nah, again, that imputes something which wasn't there. No Mexican heritage as that would imply a racial aspect to it which clearly doesn't exist and wasn't argued. Sorry but I am not going to "admit" anything because you're not clever enough to grasp the difference
 
2012-01-13 04:51:04 PM

History's Greatest Monster: I know you try to paint yourself as some sort of dispassionate independent, but it's hard not to think of you as a staunch republican when, like many others on the right, you derive pleasure from pissing off "the libs".


I do enjoy pissing off the self-righteous and arrogant on the left, that's for sure. There's also no denying I am a "conservative" as the word is often clumsily used. A conservative who favors the legalization of drugs, recognition of gay marriage, safe and legal abortion, tolerance, a sensible and functional safety net, a far more diplomatic approach to foreign policy than we've often shown, an honest and fair treatment of Israel AND Palestinians... that is to say, not what you would call a "Republican" or "conservative" at all.
 
2012-01-13 04:57:55 PM

lennavan: It seems you all would prefer to have a president making decisions based on emotions rather than facts and logic. It's farking scary. You all promised not to forget the lessons of 9/11. Wasn't one lesson we should probably relax and cool the fark off before engaging in major military conflicts? You want our next president to make that decision while upset?

Ridiculous.


Logic has to be guided by compassion. You can't be logical in a vacuum, that has terrifying consequences. A politician who acts logically but without any compassion is a very, very dangerous thing.

Consider the OWS protests. Clearly the protests cannot be allowed to continue indefinitely or be allowed to become to disruptive of the daily business of an urban metropolis. The protestors must be made to disperse.

A person acting from compassion and logic would attempt to understand the needs of the protestors, address those needs in a way that was to the maximum benefit of all involved, and allow the protests to disperse naturally. A person acting from logic alone, without any compassion for others, might decide to simply send soldiers into the square and start shooting protestors until they flee and disperse.

The hard reality is that there is no logical reason to treat other human beings with dignity if you have the power to suppress their protestations. This is why it has taken centuries to become as socially progressive as we are: Those who have the power to simply destroy resistance to their selfish pursuit of more power have no logical reason to not exercise that power. It is often not in the immediate self-interest of a person to consider the needs and desires of others.

You're right that people should favor logic over raw emotions like anger, lust, jealousy, and fear. But its a serious mistake to think that just because one shouldn't make rash decision based on raw emotion, that therefore one should make decisions with no regard to emotions and passions at all.

The difference between being clever and being enlightened is recognizing that logic without compassion is meaningless.
 
2012-01-13 05:36:06 PM
And doesn't this guy come off as the most patronizing mothefncker of all time? At his rallies he turns his whole body and takes baby steps(seriously, just watch him) like he's addressing first graders and Alzheimer's cases. "Oh, gosh and golly, I can't believe I have to talk to you idiots! Just give me the nom, you fncking morons!"
 
2012-01-13 05:43:11 PM

Nina_Hartley's_Ass: sweetmelissa31: stpauler: Gingrich: v. To cheat on your wife with an owl.

I really think this one could catch on.

"We're just friends!"

[www.washingtonpost.com image 606x403]

*shooped Newtie with raptor pic*


er...That's not an owl.
 
2012-01-13 05:43:24 PM

Nina_Hartley's_Ass: And doesn't this guy come off as the most patronizing mothefncker of all time? At his rallies he turns his whole body and takes baby steps(seriously, just watch him) like he's addressing first graders and Alzheimer's cases. "Oh, gosh and golly, I can't believe I have to talk to you idiots! Just give me the nom, you fncking morons!"


Yeah, but he speaks honestly. I saw him on the TV and he kind of spontaneously broke into "Oh beautiful for spacious skies, for amber waves of grain." It was a somber, from the heart moment. A single tear rolled down my cheek.
 
2012-01-13 05:52:35 PM

lennavan: CPennypacker: skullkrusher: CPennypacker: lennavan: It isnt often but I gotta disagree with Maddow on this one. Yeah, actually I do want a cold emotionless president making decisions, not someone who is going to make a stupid decision because he's following his/her emotions.
...snip...
I said it was reasonable. My wife's cat hates the car carrier, first time in he peed himself, presumably in terror. Should I stop taking the cat to the vet? The cat does not love the carrier and I thought using the carrier anyway was a reasonable thing to do. But apparently you are the authority figure here and if the animal doesn't absolutely love it, it must be wrong or something.


Threadjack alert...
You might want to clean out the peed-in carrier and use a product called Feliway in it. It has a calming influence.

Trying to stuff an already-scared cat into a carrier that smells of scared-outa-them pee* is a thankless, frustrating, loud and bloody task...


* Pee-outta-fear smells different (and worse) than pee-cos-the-bladder-is-full.
Trust me on this.


/ threadjack
 
2012-01-13 05:59:17 PM

sprawl15: Nina_Hartley's_Ass: And doesn't this guy come off as the most patronizing mothefncker of all time? At his rallies he turns his whole body and takes baby steps(seriously, just watch him) like he's addressing first graders and Alzheimer's cases. "Oh, gosh and golly, I can't believe I have to talk to you idiots! Just give me the nom, you fncking morons!"

Yeah, but he speaks honestly. I saw him on the TV and he kind of spontaneously broke into "Oh beautiful for spacious skies, for amber waves of grain." It was a somber, from the heart moment. A single tear rolled down my cheek.



I know exactly what you mean.
(new window)
 
2012-01-13 06:50:28 PM

Sergeant Grumbles: It's your pet. If you don't treat it like family, then you shouldn't have a pet.


BULL!!!

Your pet is not family. It is the pet. It is not and never will be a person. They are not family.

I don't care about the dog crapping itself. Hose the bastard off and stick him back in the crate -- the sooner you get to your destination the sooner your dog can go forget the whole ordeal ever happened and feast on horse poop.

Its not like you waterboarded the dog -- 8 hours in a crate doesn't sound to different from a cross pacific flight...

My sisters dog throws up constantly when she takes the 5 hour drive home for the holidays. Regardless of whether its loose or in a crate. Does it mean she shouldnt move the dog with her for extended stays?

Dogs dont like to travel. Im not going to stop my life or let the animal die because it doesnt like it. Animals are going to suffer a bit in their lives at some point. Humans tell each other that sucking it up and putting up with shiat is part of life.
 
2012-01-13 07:21:54 PM
In order to google bomb mitt one has to do things like link his name to the definition, e.g. Mitt Romney, or Mitt Romney, and include such linkages on lots of web pages that Google indexes.
 
2012-01-13 07:40:50 PM

No Such Agency: Karac:
road head is better if you're also drinking a cartoon of milk with the girl's face on it.

[i2.kym-cdn.com image 400x250]


img263.imageshack.us
 
2012-01-13 07:41:06 PM

mikefinch: Sergeant Grumbles: It's your pet. If you don't treat it like family, then you shouldn't have a pet.

BULL!!!

Your pet is not family. It is the pet. It is not and never will be a person. They are not family.

I don't care about the dog crapping itself. Hose the bastard off and stick him back in the crate -- the sooner you get to your destination the sooner your dog can go forget the whole ordeal ever happened and feast on horse poop.

Its not like you waterboarded the dog -- 8 hours in a crate doesn't sound to different from a cross pacific flight...

My sisters dog throws up constantly when she takes the 5 hour drive home for the holidays. Regardless of whether its loose or in a crate. Does it mean she shouldnt move the dog with her for extended stays?

Dogs dont like to travel. Im not going to stop my life or let the animal die because it doesnt like it. Animals are going to suffer a bit in their lives at some point. Humans tell each other that sucking it up and putting up with shiat is part of life.


How about if I put you in a box, tie you up on a car, and get on the freeway for 8 hours? And when you shiat yourself, I take you out, hose you down, throw you back in, and put you back up there?

Does that sound like an enjoyable experience to you? Or even something you should just "put up with"?

Does that sound like something that any person with an ounce of empathy would do to anyone or anything they cared about?
 
2012-01-13 09:30:33 PM

mikefinch: Your pet is not family. It is the pet. It is not and never will be a person. They are not family.


You should never own a pet.
 
2012-01-13 09:36:57 PM
See now that's just inaccurate.
It should be
Romney: v. To make someone else defecate in fear. "Last Halloween, I volunteered at a haunted house as one of the ghouls. The best part was when I Romneyed an entire school bus worth of kids at once."
 
2012-01-13 10:51:15 PM

bugontherug: U gettin' mad bro? U sound mad.


Super mad. I'm a secret Romney undercover agent plant.

skepticultist: Except now the dog is wet, which means its going to be freezing.


Wow, you just made an awful lot of assumptions here. So some journalist wrote some non-story based on something a friend heard 24 years ago and not only did you not bother to even stick to that story, you made up your own details.

Farking Romney, always being a bad person in your imaginary tales, what's up with him?

skepticultist: A politician who acts logically but without any compassion is a very, very dangerous thing.


I agree and yet I would have much rather had Romney than Bush on 9/12. Bush acted out of fear and anger, I'd rather have the cold calculated response instead.

CPennypacker: You're absolutely right. I'm sure back in the golden days of 1983, in Massachusets, it was all the rage to strap your dog's crate to the roof of your station wagon, throw him in, and drive up and down the interstate. They probably had clubs. Life was much simpler back then.


In the early 1980s it was legal to have your kid sit wherever you like in the car without a seat belt. Yeah, it was much simpler back then. You wouldn't know, you're what, 16? But you're probably right, sure you can have your 2 year old sit up front in mom's lap or hell, all by themselves but a dog in a carrier strapped safely to the roof? That's nuts!
 
2012-01-13 11:04:57 PM

bugontherug: I am right, because all the objective evidence shows that this story was pro-Romney


Yes, the author himself admitted he went into it digging for dirt and when he published it knew and assumed people would be appalled and for those reasons this was pro-Romney. A well thought out analysis.
 
2012-01-14 12:04:43 AM
By itself the story isn't much but add it to all the warmth Mr. Personality exudes and it just completes the portrait. Hope the conservatives decide to back Gingrich and turn this into a long bloody battle.
 
2012-01-14 05:40:22 AM

HeartBurnKid: How about if I put you in a box, tie you up on a car, and get on the freeway for 8 hours? And when you shiat yourself, I take you out, hose you down, throw you back in, and put you back up there?

Does that sound like an enjoyable experience to you? Or even something you should just "put up with"?

Does that sound like something that any person with an ounce of empathy would do to anyone or anything they cared about?


Yeah -- that doesn't sound enjoyable. But is it a life destroying experience? No. Its a bad freaking day. Granted its a very bad freaking day but its not going to consume my life. And dogs dont need to be given the level of dignity we afford fellow humans. They are dogs.

Im just saying - he doesn't exactly seem like the king of animal cruelty here.

Sergeant Grumbles: mikefinch: Your pet is not family. It is the pet. It is not and never will be a person. They are not family.

You should never own a pet.


Oh grumbles you big commie, I feel the same way about you.
 
2012-01-14 07:48:13 AM

lennavan: bugontherug: I am right, because all the objective evidence shows that this story was pro-Romney

Yes, the author himself admitted he went into it digging for dirt and when he published it knew and assumed people would be appalled and for those reasons this was pro-Romney. A well thought out analysis.


That would be good, if only any of it were true. In the link I posted, the author admits her efforts helped Romney. Her story cleared up some of the worst misconceptions about the incident--like the idea that Romney put the dog through a car wash. Also, her story wasn't just verified by a first hand witness, her story also recounts that witness's own positive spin on the incident. What this story tells is the Romney family's own positive spin. It's no wonder then that they've not seen fit to dispute the story. It's their own story.
 
2012-01-14 02:15:02 PM

bugontherug: That would be good, if only any of it were true. In the link I posted, the author admits her efforts helped Romney. Her story cleared up some of the worst misconceptions about the incident--like the idea that Romney put the dog through a car wash. Also, her story wasn't just verified by a first hand witness, her story also recounts that witness's own positive spin on the incident. What this story tells is the Romney family's own positive spin. It's no wonder then that they've not seen fit to dispute the story. It's their own story.


I don't think Neil is a girl's name.
 
2012-01-17 01:41:34 AM

BloodySaxon: Old-ass non stories rock!


Strapping your dog to the roof of a car for a 12-hour road trip is a "non-story" to you.

Huh. Says a lot about you.
 
Displayed 232 of 232 comments

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »






Report