Recent Comments

1. about 9 hours ago on Rabbits Against Magic

   Left out of this “discussion”:

   The very same folks who repeatedly insisted that the Hunter Biden laptop, later entered as evidence in a Federal felony trial, was “Russian disinformation”, are the same folks who tried to claim, before the recent debate, that all the video clips Republicans and right-leaning media were showing of Biden’s bumbles, stumbles, gaffes, and stuttering incoherently were “deep fakes.”

   Right after the debate, I saw posts that said “I got yer ‘deep fakes’ right here, b*tches!!!!!!”

2. about 11 hours ago on Stone Soup

   And thus were the vegetarians born.

   One rule of thumb I’ve heard is NEVER to let your kids hear that someone, anyone, “doesn’t like” some particular food. Kids will balk at even trying anything they have heard someone else express disgust or distaste of. If you don’t care for, say, Mexican food or lamb, take the kids to a Mexican restaurant (Taco Bell doesn’t count) or a Greek festival. I grew up becoming bewildered at the idea that people didn’t like certain foods, and have eaten everything from haggis to scrapple to c*ck-a-leekie soup to pineapple on a pizza…..

3. about 23 hours ago on Arlo and Janis

   How to tell you’re just “making s*** up”:

   The infamous incident where Limbaugh held up a picture of Chelsea and called it “the White House’s new dog” was on his (short-lived) TV show, NOT his radio show. It’s possible he repeated the joke on his radio show, but given the constant bashing of Limbaugh from the left (including an entire corporation set up JUST to listen to and condemn Limbaugh. Media Matters for America), I would have heard of it by now.

4. about 24 hours ago on Non Sequitur

   Nope.

   If we insist on that mentality, then the folks who die at 64 or just before retirement (as three of my friends have) should get massive rebates to their estates for never getting to use Medicare, collect SS, etc. At least Railroad Retirement paid something to the heirs of the one guy. (Don’t buy into that falsehood that SS is “your money”—that’s a lie perpetrated by the masters of the Ponzi scheme so you’ll go along with it.)

5. 2 days ago on Non Sequitur

   Sure—as soon as we eliminate ALL their use of things paid for by taxes (roads, libraries, “senior centers,” Medicare, you name it….)

6. 2 days ago on The Argyle Sweater

   The original 1994 name for what became Amazon was Cadabra. Which was later deemed to sound too much like “cadaver.”

7. 6 days ago on Luann

   All I can think of when I see this artist’s style is that episode of “Family Guy” where Stewie and Brian, bouncing between alternate universes, ended up in one where everything was exaggeratedly drawn as a Disney cartoon, and Peter ends up bursting out into a long song “It’s a Wonderful Day For Pie”…………….. And to those of you that now have that awful earworm living in your skull now, I apologize.

8. 16 days ago on In Security

   Perhaps not intentionally.

   I’ve found some cellphones in fairly odd locations—such as one time sharing an arena seat cup holder with a rolled-up disposable diaper………

9. 18 days ago on Pearls Before Swine

   And if the Appellate (or Supreme) court makes a decision that concurs with the legal experts that I read state, then what you deemed “bs” suddenly becomes “facts.” It’s not “bs” simply because you don’t like it or agree.

   Even the so-called “fact-checking” sites have been routinely guilty of either excluding pertinent “facts” that veer from a chosen narrative or refusing to examine “inconvenient” facts/stories.

10. 20 days ago on Pearls Before Swine

    Nope, sorry. Just about any time someone tries to speak in absolute terms about anything but physics, chemistry, and math, they’re trying to stifle fair debate.

    Trump was found guilty of questionable charges by a jury that was given instructions by a judge that many legal experts say infringed upon Trump’s constitutional right to a fair trial. I’ve seen LOTS of essays by concurring legal experts and professors.

    Your oversimplification would be like saying “The Supreme Court stated abortion is illegal.” A proper accounting would go into detail about exactly why the SCOTUS overturned Roe v. Wade and what the ultimate ramifications would be at the state level. But that requires critical thinking.