Skip to content
 
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.

(NBC News)   Chief Justice John Roberts: "I didn't sign up for this"   (nbcnews.com) divider line
    More: Obvious, George W. Bush, United States Senate, President of the United States, duty John Roberts, Democratic Party, Chief Justice, Chief Justice of the United States, Senate trial of Andrew Johnson  
•       •       •

5801 clicks; posted to Politics » on 13 Jan 2020 at 3:21 PM (5 weeks ago)   |   Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



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


Oldest | « | 1 | 2 | » | Newest | Show all

 
2020-01-13 11:26:41 AM  
I'm going to go out on a limb here and suggest the Founders used the word "preside" because they expect a judge to run a trial like a real trial. I'll climb further out and suggest the Founders would not approve of the Senate making up the rules as it goes along.
 
2020-01-13 01:09:23 PM  

edmo: I'm going to go out on a limb here and suggest the Founders used the word "preside" because they expect a judge to run a trial like a real trial. I'll climb further out and suggest the Founders would not approve of the Senate making up the rules as it goes along.


You'd be wrong. The concept of the Senate was of Elder Statesmen and meritocracy. With full knowledge of how unreasonable individuals can be, the assertion of a representative democracy is that there does exist an underlying merit and nobility to the best of us that will rise to the needs of the moment. Of necessity we entrust the to do that. They are supposed to be a deliberative body.

Of course McConnell's style destroys that. There is virtually no deliberation, no authentic debate. And sadly, no revolt from Senate members. McCain's vote was the last gasp of such a revolt,not voting against the repeal of the ACA because he liked the ACA, but because the Senate had refused to follow Regular Order, debate within Committee and on the Floor.

You can well say that the founding principles would despise the ways this Senate behaves, but in concept the would have been fine with a properly operating Senate adopting and adapting rules.
 
2020-01-13 03:23:30 PM  
I will enjoy watching Roberts lick Mitch McConnel's boots like the sycophant sack of trash he is.
 
2020-01-13 03:23:35 PM  
Chief Justice Roberts, prepare to run the shiatshow of the decade.
 
2020-01-13 03:24:58 PM  
Yeah you did farkhead, you gutting the voting rights act is why we have Trump
 
2020-01-13 03:25:29 PM  
Image of what Roberts having to deal with Moscow Mitch probably feels like:

pics.me.meView Full Size
 
2020-01-13 03:25:57 PM  
YES YOU DID!
Youtube kxnsmsXYGJ4
 
2020-01-13 03:27:29 PM  
You agreed to be one of the nine people equally at the top of a gov't branch's rulings, then the one who has more power over the other eight by way of what they hear and the rules they hear under. You signed up for a tough political job that leaves a legacy, good or bad, that your children will carry when you're gone. You did sign up for this. Sorry about the hell you put your children's futures through, cockass.
 
2020-01-13 03:27:34 PM  
Roberts' role will be more master of ceremonies than trial judge.

Then they'd be better off just using Steve Harvey.
 
2020-01-13 03:28:40 PM  
How will he run it? In whatever way he thinks will be least damaging to his legacy, personally, knowing that #MoscowMitch and the Rethuglican Party plan on voting not guilty no matter what evidence is presented.
 
2020-01-13 03:29:56 PM  
Chief Justice Roberts: "I'm too old for this--"

Narrator: "STUFF! He said stuff."
 
2020-01-13 03:30:20 PM  

edmo: I'm going to go out on a limb here and suggest the Founders used the word "preside" because they expect a judge to run a trial like a real trial. I'll climb further out and suggest the Founders would not approve of the Senate making up the rules as it goes along.


I strongly maintain that if the founders were around today, they'd be like "holy shiat, airplanes?!" before asking the nearest black person to fetch them the fainting couch.
 
2020-01-13 03:30:28 PM  
He should have expected to do this for Dubya.
 
2020-01-13 03:31:31 PM  
I think we all agree that it'd be better if it was run by Kavanaugh.

/we'd get some good drinking games.
 
2020-01-13 03:31:34 PM  
The whole country didn't sign up for this.. and now it needs to end.  Like an arrow in your ass, it needs to come out.
 
2020-01-13 03:33:18 PM  
If the judge had any effect on the 'trial' whatsoever, I'd rather see Judge Judy presiding, because Judge Judy is awesome.
 
2020-01-13 03:33:53 PM  
Ya want me to do it?  I plan on listening to all the arguments, review all the information and presenting an impartial judgement of "Gill-cup as all Hell - Consinged to the Malto Mines on Keebly IV

I know he doesn't get to judge D2S but I'll slip in to my agreement or lunch order or parking pass.  Here, Turtleman.  Please to sign.  I am silly man with no millions.  No read. You no read.  You very busy man.  Big things you do.  Thanky Thanky Thanky.


Sucker.
 
2020-01-13 03:35:52 PM  

edmo: I'm going to go out on a limb here and suggest the Founders used the word "preside" because they expect a judge to run a trial like a real trial. I'll climb further out and suggest the Founders would not approve of the Senate making up the rules as it goes along.


It's only the Chief Justice in cases of the President.  For other impeachments, it's left to the Senate to decide who runs it.  And it was likely assumed that would be the President of the Senate - the VP, who at the time was the second place finisher in the election, and likely a political rival of the President.  So it would probably be a bad look to have the VP influencing a proceeding that decides if he moves up to the top spot or not.
 
2020-01-13 03:36:52 PM  
Cry moar, Roberts. Your court is going down in history as the arbiter of the failure of democracy, and you're going to be forced to sit front and center and watch helplessly as your party turns a president into a dictator. And at the end, you'll have to sign off on it.

All those vanity opinions where you threw the liberals a token gesture won't mean a thing for your legacy after this.
 
2020-01-13 03:40:24 PM  
The entire original constitution and bill of rights were written to be read as written.  I shiat you not.  They wanted you to read it and then apply it in the most logical way.

Yes yes charlatans have exploited the Article III branch.  However, the SCOTUS wasn't meant to be the arbiter of common sense.

It is only due to people who will not ever do their jobs diligently that the SCOTUS has become the power that it is.  The founders never envisioned the farking idiots would ever run the government, and that complete phrases such as "well regulated militia" would just be cast aside by farking idiots.

Which is why they had no concept of a "popular vote" or even "democracy".  They wrote this shiat about equality while owning slaves...need I say more?

The sad part is that if we ever do have a constitutional congress, it will be run by the dumbest and most popular.
 
2020-01-13 03:40:59 PM  

wademh: edmo: I'm going to go out on a limb here and suggest the Founders used the word "preside" because they expect a judge to run a trial like a real trial. I'll climb further out and suggest the Founders would not approve of the Senate making up the rules as it goes along.

You'd be wrong. The concept of the Senate was of Elder Statesmen and meritocracy. With full knowledge of how unreasonable individuals can be, the assertion of a representative democracy is that there does exist an underlying merit and nobility to the best of us that will rise to the needs of the moment. Of necessity we entrust the to do that. They are supposed to be a deliberative body.

Of course McConnell's style destroys that. There is virtually no deliberation, no authentic debate. And sadly, no revolt from Senate members. McCain's vote was the last gasp of such a revolt,not voting against the repeal of the ACA because he liked the ACA, but because the Senate had refused to follow Regular Order, debate within Committee and on the Floor.

You can well say that the founding principles would despise the ways this Senate behaves, but in concept the would have been fine with a properly operating Senate adopting and adapting rules.


Every day, it becomes clearer just how flawed the Constitution was, from the very start. Who knew that rich white slave-owners 200 years ago weren't omniscient demigods who created the world's most perfect system of government?
 
2020-01-13 03:41:27 PM  

Alphax: The whole country didn't sign up for this.. and now it needs to end.  Like an arrow in your ass, it needs to come out.


Don't you kink shame me.
 
2020-01-13 03:43:08 PM  

MattytheMouse: edmo: I'm going to go out on a limb here and suggest the Founders used the word "preside" because they expect a judge to run a trial like a real trial. I'll climb further out and suggest the Founders would not approve of the Senate making up the rules as it goes along.

I strongly maintain that if the founders were around today, they'd be like "holy shiat, airplanes?!" before asking the nearest black person to fetch them the fainting couch.


If they don't get hit by a car while gawking in the street first.
 
2020-01-13 03:43:12 PM  

gyruss: Cry moar, Roberts. Your court is going down in history as the arbiter of the failure of democracy, and you're going to be forced to sit front and center and watch helplessly as your party turns a president into a dictator. And at the end, you'll have to sign off on it.

All those vanity opinions where you threw the liberals a token gesture won't mean a thing for your legacy after this.


Who's to say this isn't what he wanted. He's just embarrassed that Trump is saying the quiet parts out loud, demonstrating how morally and intellectually bankrupt conservatives are.
 
2020-01-13 03:44:23 PM  
I'm somewhat hopeful that as Chief Justice Roberts has a better understanding pf the historical consequences of what's about to occur and that will temper any of his partisan inclinations.
 
2020-01-13 03:47:51 PM  

Crewmannumber6: I'm somewhat hopeful that as Chief Justice Roberts has a better understanding pf the historical consequences of what's about to occur and that will temper any of his partisan inclinations.


What's about to happen is the logical conclusion of his ruling that the Voting Rights Act doesn't count, while he watches helplessly from a front-row seat.
 
2020-01-13 03:50:15 PM  

MattytheMouse: edmo: I'm going to go out on a limb here and suggest the Founders used the word "preside" because they expect a judge to run a trial like a real trial. I'll climb further out and suggest the Founders would not approve of the Senate making up the rules as it goes along.

I strongly maintain that if the founders were around today, they'd be like "holy shiat, airplanes?!" before asking the nearest black person to fetch them the fainting couch.


Airplanes hell, flush a goddamn toilet for them
 
2020-01-13 03:52:44 PM  

ElwoodCuse: MattytheMouse: edmo: I'm going to go out on a limb here and suggest the Founders used the word "preside" because they expect a judge to run a trial like a real trial. I'll climb further out and suggest the Founders would not approve of the Senate making up the rules as it goes along.

I strongly maintain that if the founders were around today, they'd be like "holy shiat, airplanes?!" before asking the nearest black person to fetch them the fainting couch.

Airplanes hell, flush a goddamn toilet for them


If you are a Netflix show producer, make a series about how America's founding fathers would really react to the modern world.

// Easy money and a conversation with society  worth having.
 
2020-01-13 03:57:00 PM  

Badmoodman: Roberts' role will be more master of ceremonies than trial judge.

Then they'd be better off just using Steve Harvey.


Ricky Gervais!

No, no! Tina Fey and Amy Poehler!!!!
 
2020-01-13 03:58:11 PM  

MattytheMouse: edmo: I'm going to go out on a limb here and suggest the Founders used the word "preside" because they expect a judge to run a trial like a real trial. I'll climb further out and suggest the Founders would not approve of the Senate making up the rules as it goes along.

I strongly maintain that if the founders were around today, they'd be like "holy shiat, airplanes?!" before asking the nearest black person to fetch them the fainting couch.


Franklin would be like, "Have you guys seen this internet!?"
 
2020-01-13 03:58:46 PM  
The hell you didn't. You took an oath to the Constitution.

/not that it's stopped Republicans from ignoring it
 
2020-01-13 03:59:51 PM  

AlgaeRancher: ElwoodCuse: MattytheMouse: edmo: I'm going to go out on a limb here and suggest the Founders used the word "preside" because they expect a judge to run a trial like a real trial. I'll climb further out and suggest the Founders would not approve of the Senate making up the rules as it goes along.

I strongly maintain that if the founders were around today, they'd be like "holy shiat, airplanes?!" before asking the nearest black person to fetch them the fainting couch.

Airplanes hell, flush a goddamn toilet for them

If you are a Netflix show producer, make a series about how America's founding fathers would really react to the modern world.

// Easy money and a conversation with society  worth having.


The underlying point to my joke is that, while the founding fathers, you know, founded the foundation for what our country was built upon, that they shouldn't be the end all be all of how we move forward... You know,  because they were kind of deeply flawed individuals whose ideas don't totally mesh with today's world.

I think if I were in charge of that show, that's kind of how I'd handle it; show that the founding fathers were not always right, not always friendly towards each other, and that they were crucible of often conflicting ideas, and how they grew and evolved from their experiences.

At any rate, I'd definitely love to have a scene with Thomas Jefferson really laying into the Christian-Right, when he's not doing something obscenely racist. Oh..! And Benjamin Franklin discovering internet porn!
 
2020-01-13 04:00:13 PM  

GreatGlavinsGhost: MattytheMouse: edmo: I'm going to go out on a limb here and suggest the Founders used the word "preside" because they expect a judge to run a trial like a real trial. I'll climb further out and suggest the Founders would not approve of the Senate making up the rules as it goes along.

I strongly maintain that if the founders were around today, they'd be like "holy shiat, airplanes?!" before asking the nearest black person to fetch them the fainting couch.

Franklin would be like, "Have you guys seen this internet!?"


Heck, you beat me to it.
 
2020-01-13 04:01:50 PM  

Catlenfell: Chief Justice Roberts, prepare to run the shiatshow of the decade.


If you think this is the shiatshow of the decade, just wait until November, no matter who wins.

/unless you're using the accurate measure that this is the last year of the decade, despite what XKCD claims
 
2020-01-13 04:01:55 PM  
Can Roberts also throw out Senators who are found to be complicit in the quid pro quo?
 
2020-01-13 04:02:34 PM  

GreatGlavinsGhost: MattytheMouse: edmo: I'm going to go out on a limb here and suggest the Founders used the word "preside" because they expect a judge to run a trial like a real trial. I'll climb further out and suggest the Founders would not approve of the Senate making up the rules as it goes along.

I strongly maintain that if the founders were around today, they'd be like "holy shiat, airplanes?!" before asking the nearest black person to fetch them the fainting couch.

Franklin would be like, "Have you guys seen this internet!?"


He'd quickly find things that would make Clarkson recoil in horror.

Wait, no he wouldn't. Those things don't exist, except on the Citroen website.
 
2020-01-13 04:03:58 PM  
*Always Sunny theme*

The Founding Fathers Learn about School Shootings.
 
2020-01-13 04:04:40 PM  

ElwoodCuse: MattytheMouse: edmo: I'm going to go out on a limb here and suggest the Founders used the word "preside" because they expect a judge to run a trial like a real trial. I'll climb further out and suggest the Founders would not approve of the Senate making up the rules as it goes along.

I strongly maintain that if the founders were around today, they'd be like "holy shiat, airplanes?!" before asking the nearest black person to fetch them the fainting couch.

Airplanes hell, flush a goddamn toilet for them


This thread is now about naming modern devices that would most freak out the Founding Fathers, go!
 
2020-01-13 04:05:19 PM  

LordJiro: wademh: edmo: I'm going to go out on a limb here and suggest the Founders used the word "preside" because they expect a judge to run a trial like a real trial. I'll climb further out and suggest the Founders would not approve of the Senate making up the rules as it goes along.

You'd be wrong. The concept of the Senate was of Elder Statesmen and meritocracy. With full knowledge of how unreasonable individuals can be, the assertion of a representative democracy is that there does exist an underlying merit and nobility to the best of us that will rise to the needs of the moment. Of necessity we entrust the to do that. They are supposed to be a deliberative body.

Of course McConnell's style destroys that. There is virtually no deliberation, no authentic debate. And sadly, no revolt from Senate members. McCain's vote was the last gasp of such a revolt,not voting against the repeal of the ACA because he liked the ACA, but because the Senate had refused to follow Regular Order, debate within Committee and on the Floor.

You can well say that the founding principles would despise the ways this Senate behaves, but in concept the would have been fine with a properly operating Senate adopting and adapting rules.


Every day, it becomes clearer just how flawed the Constitution was, from the very start. Who knew that rich white slave-owners 200 years ago weren't omniscient demigods who created the world's most perfect system of government?


I'm not ass convinced that it's the Constitution that's flawed. The flaw in in "We The People" reflected in who we elect. When one considers the alternatives, it could have specified more in the way of specific values but then it left that to the Amendment process. And so we got prohibition when that reflected a common value, and we got rid of it when it no longer did. We added the 14 Amendment when we collectively became somewhat more enlightened, and the 19th when we gained further enlightenment.

The problem is not with the Constitution. The problem is with us. But it would probably be a bigger and more lasting problem to give any specific subset of us enduring authority to lock in a set of values that couldn't be changed in the future. One can perhaps argue that the Constitution puts forth the challenge to be worthy of self-rule and that people often simply are not so worthy. The retort is that then you don't deserve any better.
 
2020-01-13 04:05:27 PM  

MattytheMouse: GreatGlavinsGhost: MattytheMouse: edmo: I'm going to go out on a limb here and suggest the Founders used the word "preside" because they expect a judge to run a trial like a real trial. I'll climb further out and suggest the Founders would not approve of the Senate making up the rules as it goes along.

I strongly maintain that if the founders were around today, they'd be like "holy shiat, airplanes?!" before asking the nearest black person to fetch them the fainting couch.

Franklin would be like, "Have you guys seen this internet!?"

Heck, you beat me to it.


I would pay for a subscription to FranklinHub.com
 
2020-01-13 04:08:44 PM  

wademh: LordJiro: wademh: edmo: I'm going to go out on a limb here and suggest the Founders used the word "preside" because they expect a judge to run a trial like a real trial. I'll climb further out and suggest the Founders would not approve of the Senate making up the rules as it goes along.

You'd be wrong. The concept of the Senate was of Elder Statesmen and meritocracy. With full knowledge of how unreasonable individuals can be, the assertion of a representative democracy is that there does exist an underlying merit and nobility to the best of us that will rise to the needs of the moment. Of necessity we entrust the to do that. They are supposed to be a deliberative body.

Of course McConnell's style destroys that. There is virtually no deliberation, no authentic debate. And sadly, no revolt from Senate members. McCain's vote was the last gasp of such a revolt,not voting against the repeal of the ACA because he liked the ACA, but because the Senate had refused to follow Regular Order, debate within Committee and on the Floor.

You can well say that the founding principles would despise the ways this Senate behaves, but in concept the would have been fine with a properly operating Senate adopting and adapting rules.

Every day, it becomes clearer just how flawed the Constitution was, from the very start. Who knew that rich white slave-owners 200 years ago weren't omniscient demigods who created the world's most perfect system of government?

I'm not ass convinced that it's the Constitution that's flawed. The flaw in in "We The People" reflected in who we elect. When one considers the alternatives, it could have specified more in the way of specific values but then it left that to the Amendment process. And so we got prohibition when that reflected a common value, and we got rid of it when it no longer did. We added the 14 Amendment when we collectively became somewhat more enlightened, and the 19th when we gained further enlightenment.

The problem is not with the Constitution. The problem is with us. But it would probably be a bigger and more lasting problem to give any specific subset of us enduring authority to lock in a set of values that couldn't be changed in the future. One can perhaps argue that the Constitution puts forth the challenge to be worthy of self-rule and that people often simply are not so worthy. The retort is that then you don't deserve any better.


Somebody had a take in a Fark thread several months ago: our government is founded on gentlemen's agreements, and Trump is not a gentleman.

I wish I could remember who said that, because that's stuck with me.
 
2020-01-13 04:12:34 PM  

AlgaeRancher: ElwoodCuse: MattytheMouse: edmo: I'm going to go out on a limb here and suggest the Founders used the word "preside" because they expect a judge to run a trial like a real trial. I'll climb further out and suggest the Founders would not approve of the Senate making up the rules as it goes along.

I strongly maintain that if the founders were around today, they'd be like "holy shiat, airplanes?!" before asking the nearest black person to fetch them the fainting couch.

Airplanes hell, flush a goddamn toilet for them

If you are a Netflix show producer, make a series about how America's founding fathers would really react to the modern world.

// Easy money and a conversation with society  worth having.


Depends if they went for "serious discussion about the founders' intentions" or "wacky time travel adventure".
 
2020-01-13 04:12:36 PM  

MattytheMouse: wademh: LordJiro: wademh: edmo: I'm going to go out on a limb here and suggest the Founders used the word "preside" because they expect a judge to run a trial like a real trial. I'll climb further out and suggest the Founders would not approve of the Senate making up the rules as it goes along.

You'd be wrong. The concept of the Senate was of Elder Statesmen and meritocracy. With full knowledge of how unreasonable individuals can be, the assertion of a representative democracy is that there does exist an underlying merit and nobility to the best of us that will rise to the needs of the moment. Of necessity we entrust the to do that. They are supposed to be a deliberative body.

Of course McConnell's style destroys that. There is virtually no deliberation, no authentic debate. And sadly, no revolt from Senate members. McCain's vote was the last gasp of such a revolt,not voting against the repeal of the ACA because he liked the ACA, but because the Senate had refused to follow Regular Order, debate within Committee and on the Floor.

You can well say that the founding principles would despise the ways this Senate behaves, but in concept the would have been fine with a properly operating Senate adopting and adapting rules.

Every day, it becomes clearer just how flawed the Constitution was, from the very start. Who knew that rich white slave-owners 200 years ago weren't omniscient demigods who created the world's most perfect system of government?

I'm not ass convinced that it's the Constitution that's flawed. The flaw in in "We The People" reflected in who we elect. When one considers the alternatives, it could have specified more in the way of specific values but then it left that to the Amendment process. And so we got prohibition when that reflected a common value, and we got rid of it when it no longer did. We added the 14 Amendment when we collectively became somewhat more enlightened, and the 19th when we gained further enlightenment.

The problem is not with the Constitution. The problem is with us. But it would probably be a bigger and more lasting problem to give any specific subset of us enduring authority to lock in a set of values that couldn't be changed in the future. One can perhaps argue that the Constitution puts forth the challenge to be worthy of self-rule and that people often simply are not so worthy. The retort is that then you don't deserve any better.

Somebody had a take in a Fark thread several months ago: our government is founded on gentlemen's agreements, and Trump is not a gentleman.

I wish I could remember who said that, because that's stuck with me.


I think it was Palined Parenthood?
 
2020-01-13 04:14:34 PM  

Tyrone Slothrop: AlgaeRancher: ElwoodCuse: MattytheMouse: edmo: I'm going to go out on a limb here and suggest the Founders used the word "preside" because they expect a judge to run a trial like a real trial. I'll climb further out and suggest the Founders would not approve of the Senate making up the rules as it goes along.

I strongly maintain that if the founders were around today, they'd be like "holy shiat, airplanes?!" before asking the nearest black person to fetch them the fainting couch.

Airplanes hell, flush a goddamn toilet for them

If you are a Netflix show producer, make a series about how America's founding fathers would really react to the modern world.

// Easy money and a conversation with society  worth having.

Depends if they went for "serious discussion about the founders' intentions" or "wacky time travel adventure".


What, are you saying that Bill and Ted wasn't a serious exploration about all those historical figures seeing their impact on the modern world...?
 
2020-01-13 04:14:49 PM  

MattytheMouse: Somebody had a take in a Fark thread several months ago: our government is founded on gentlemen's agreements, and Trump is not a gentleman.

I wish I could remember who said that, because that's stuck with me.

I think it was Palined Parenthood?


I know that's something I've said before, but I'm sure I'm not the only one.
 
2020-01-13 04:16:08 PM  

MattytheMouse: Somebody had a take in a Fark thread several months ago: our government is founded on gentlemen's agreements, and Trump is not a gentleman.


Ooo, that's good.

The subsequent problem is that breaking gentlemen's agreements, when broken in an egregious enough manner to justify it, led to things like duels and canings.

The rise of "we should all be polite, and 'use our words!' " was not accompanied by a fall in "some people will be GIANT assholes," and, well... here we are.
 
2020-01-13 04:20:25 PM  

GreatGlavinsGhost: MattytheMouse: edmo: I'm going to go out on a limb here and suggest the Founders used the word "preside" because they expect a judge to run a trial like a real trial. I'll climb further out and suggest the Founders would not approve of the Senate making up the rules as it goes along.

I strongly maintain that if the founders were around today, they'd be like "holy shiat, airplanes?!" before asking the nearest black person to fetch them the fainting couch.

Franklin would be like, "Have you guys seen this internet!?"


He'd be pissed about them shutting down backpage and craigslist.
 
2020-01-13 04:23:14 PM  

MattytheMouse: I'd definitely love to have a scene with Thomas Jefferson really laying into the Christian-Right, when he's not doing something obscenely racist. Oh..! And Benjamin Franklin discovering internet porn!


Ben Franklin discovering Internet porn is a sketch I may have to write.  At least I think he would be unimpressed considering how much bedroom diplomacy he did.
 
2020-01-13 04:25:06 PM  

harleyquinnical: MattytheMouse: I'd definitely love to have a scene with Thomas Jefferson really laying into the Christian-Right, when he's not doing something obscenely racist. Oh..! And Benjamin Franklin discovering internet porn!

Ben Franklin discovering Internet porn is a sketch I may have to write.  At least I think he would be unimpressed considering how much bedroom diplomacy he did.


Franklin is the kind of person who'd hang out at strip clubs and eat at the buffet.
 
2020-01-13 04:26:52 PM  
The more I think about Franklin as a character, the more I want to cast Danny Devito to play him the same way he'd essentially play Frank.
 
Displayed 50 of 67 comments


Oldest | « | 1 | 2 | » | Newest | Show all


View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

This thread is closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Fark and Schnitt podcast logo





On Twitter




In Other Media
Top Commented
Javascript is required to view headlines in widget.
  1. Links are submitted by members of the Fark community.

  2. When community members submit a link, they also write a custom headline for the story.

  3. Other Farkers comment on the links. This is the number of comments. Click here to read them.

  4. Click here to submit a link.

Report