21 Comments:

I agree.

The idea of banning flag burning couldn't be more counter to the ideals of America's founding.

And, as others have said, it's a great way to recognize the idiots among us anyway...

By  Anonymous, at 8:24 AM  

I accidentally put a word verification in my above post. I'm sorry. It was me. Ain't trying to hide...

By  Anonymous, at 8:25 AM  

Why do you hate America? I don't call names, but this is just part of the cult-like leftist devotion to the destruction of America. Not that I"m calling you cultist or devoted to the destruction of America. No name caller, I.

What am I, you ask? (I see that you didn't, but bear with me. We're already 1/14th the way through this comment.) I'm a free-thinker who has written many articles (sadly, none with URLs) on this very subject. I've gotten very positive reviews from this guy at work who sends me cool links to Newsmax. Your hate-filled liberal orthodoxy probably requires you to call us Freepy. Not that I'm calling you a hateful person. I don't call names. But your orthodoxy -- wow, like, totally full of hate. And, anyway, you're wrong about flags.

Car dealerships don't have flags for commercial purposes. The flags provide shade, which keeps the cars cool. That's conservation, my friend. George Bush came up with the idea. In fact, he invented shade. Sorry, I don't have the link on that.

So, even though George Bush (who I disagree with totally on the environment because he's such a freakin' tree hugger that he has his budies in the timber industry go to the national parks to cut down trees and bring them to a place where it would be more convenient for him to express his man-on-tree love, which is one more reason why we can't let gays marry) invented shade, all the pinkos just want to complain that he didn't invent solar power, too. Well, that's not a very productive attitude. Besides, Bill Clinton didn't invent solar power, either. And, some people said he had a problem with his weight. Not that I'm calling him a fatty fatty fat fat. But, seriously. Find a picture. The dude inspired that horrible anti-business diatribe of movie. I didn't see it, but anybody who can't eat McDonald's for a month is a total pussy.

The real reason you hate America and want to burn flags to destroy the shade is because you hate cars. As everyone knows, cars now have "computer" chips in them. Computers were invented because Reagan gave tax credits for research and development. He also personally visited key researchers at their homes to thank them for their hard work.

I hear he slipped them all $20s, which was kind of a lot of money in those days. I think it was around the time that Jimmy Carter traded Suzanne Sommers' arms for terrorists. At least she's still master of her thighs. Yowza.

So, really, you hate Reagan, who was the emodiment of Lincoln and FRD, without all the liberal stuff. I mean, he was like a totally great leader who cut taxes by a million percent and is the only known person to create a delayed economic expansion. The study is still out on whether the current economic expansion is because Reagan cut taxes or whether it's because Reagan just totally rocked.

We should pray in schools for more leaders like Reagan, but liberals hate God. Not that generalize or am calling you any names. Godless god-haters.

Milk
Eggs
Bacon
Wonder bread
Toothpaste

The sad thing is that liberals are too afraid to debate. Not that I'm calling you cowards, even though you are cowardly. These facts are all well-known to anyone who gets all his news from approved sources, preferably those officially on the Bush payroll.

And that's why San Dimas High School Football Rules!

By  Hammer, at 8:39 AM  

Attempts at humor work best when there is a kernel of truth to them.

The only way this last post passes is in its length.

However, it misses the mark in almost every other way.

For instance, I've never "name-dropped". I mentioned articles I've written against Bush, not to pump up the articles, which I've never claimed were "big time"(they are not), but only to demonstrate various issues which I disagree with Bush on, which was in direct response of somebody accusing me of being a Bush crony.

And again, they assumed I was a Bush crony, not because of anything I said to that effect, but because I disagree with the New York Times posting National Security Secrets and think Thomas Jefferson was a Libertarian... To the guy I was responding to, that must mean I love everything Bush does! That's some high-thinking...

And then you go on to create some ultra-conservative stereotype, full of "you hate America" crap and other lines liberals might image Conservatives to utter - when I've never said anything even remotely close to anything like that in any of my posts. You act as if I've posted like a "Freeper", when I've done nothing of the sort.

All I've done is say my piece, responding directly to those who have responded to me, and answering in a point by point fashion, trying to back up my arguments with evidence.

For some reason, this is apparently distasteful to you.

One other thing you got right, however. I have mentioned the name-calling and personal invective, and with good reason. I never called anybody here a name, but got called "douchebag", apparently simply because I disagree. Funny when I go to a Conservative blog and disagree, those names(or posts like this) don't fly so easily...

I also never devolved into a long post trying to paint a negative stereotype of another poster here, as you've just done. Does it drive you so crazy that I disagree with you, that you have to slip into attacking me rather than simply engaging what I've said?

Do you think this makes you "smart", or supports your point of view? To attack me for no reason, and when I have not attacked you?

Engaging what you've said is all I've done on this blog. And isn't that what blogs are supposed to be about? An exchange of ideas?

It seems a blogger wouldn't begrudge a commenter his ideas, even if in disagreement, and especially when the commenter has not trolled with negative name-calling or personal invective.

If you only want like-minded people to post here, then I can certainly go away and not subject you to an alternate point of view which apparently drives you up the wall so.

By  Anonymous, at 8:55 AM  

And this is in response to a post where I AGREE with this blog!

Nice.

By  Anonymous, at 8:56 AM  

I don't know about anyone else, but you amuse the hell out of me, David. Anyone who thinks the comments on Three Way News are more vitriolic than, say, Free Republic, Red State, Power Line, or Captain's Quarters merits careful examination.

By  Hammer, at 9:14 AM  

I'll give you Free Republic.

Red State? I don't know, and don't have time to check.

Powerline - they don't even have comments on their site.

Captain's Quarters - I just went and checked out their comments - I didn't find a single "douchebag"-like name-call, and I didn't find Captain Ed writing a lame parody post about somebody he disagreed with on his site...

Free Republican is a dungeon all its own, the Right's equivalent to Daily Kos or Democratic Underground.

Most of the rest of the Right blogosphere, is not nearly as vitriolic in their comments as the Left. Not even close.

For instance, centrist blogger Ann Althouse almost always has very idea-based, civil comments. It's only when one of her posts is linked on one of the lefty blogs that the site gets flooded with name-callers, poor grammar, and general nastiness.

By  Anonymous, at 9:28 AM  

Not that you would ever call names yourself, but you have noticed that readers of lefty blogs are nasty, ungrammatical name-callers.

Cpt. Ed doesn't do parody, 'cause he's not funny. I, on the other hand, am HILARIOUS.

By  Hammer, at 10:07 AM  

Can't we all just get along?

By  Joey de Vivre, at 11:00 AM  

No!

Prick.

:)

By  Hammer, at 11:18 AM  

Joey,

I'd love to.

I certainly didn't pick this fight.

Unless daring to disagree constitutes "picking a fight" around here.

Since my disagreement was met with charges of being a "douchebag", as well as ill-attempts at spiteful parody directed toward me by one of the proprieters of this blog.

By  Anonymous, at 11:26 AM  

I would also love to.

if they were of the same interest: making america a better place.

instead of the hate filled douchebag republican agenda.

By  Anonymous, at 11:29 AM  

Hammer - that would've been funnier without the smiley.

You are an unutterably foul trollop and a perverted, toe-sucking piece of excrement attached to a dog's posterior.*

*Thanks to the insult generator at insultmonger.com. If I had any guts, I'd have used their "slangmonger."

By  Joey de Vivre, at 11:38 AM  

Republicans want to make American a better place as well.

Just about all of us rank and file, from both sides obviously want that.

We simply have different beliefs about how to achieve that result.

That's the first thing that must be recognized before we can move forward and actually talk these issues out to find the best solutions.

By  Anonymous, at 11:43 AM  

Everyone's a critic. This post is getting truer all the time.

Hey, TP, I found a solution so that we can all get along. If you call an idea or a post "douchebaggy" or "spiteful" that's not name calling and therefore okay. Just don't say the author is a douchebag or spiteful. Then no one will have hurt feelings.

Jambo, get your guitar. It's time for a little kum-bah-ya: Someone's posting Lord; kumbayah.

Clearly David doesn't like the word "douchebag". I don't like it much myself, but I don't have a visceral reaction to it. "Ass wipe", OTOH, I really can't stand.

By  Hammer, at 11:49 AM  

how about

#1 get people elected into office that thier only priority isnt to get re elected.

#2 give themselves a pay cut and give minimum wage a pay raise???

By  Anonymous, at 11:49 AM  

my posts are always a 10 to me

By  Anonymous, at 11:56 AM  

Isn't that a Billy Joel song?

By  Hammer, at 1:17 PM  

Sorry David, Three Way news is an equalateral triangle. All the sides have to be the same.

I don't even know why people get upset about other people burning their flags. They claim it is some sort of "defiling" of an America symbol which indicates or causes a lack of respect. I don't think anyone lost respect or quit visiting the Oval Office despite the sick things that happened to the Presidential Seal in there.

By  Anonymous, at 1:23 PM  

oh to only have the innocence of a sex scandal.

By  Anonymous, at 1:29 PM  

Yeah, I won't even talk to Libby Mae or Jambo if they don't agree with me 100%.

If I can borrow a joke from Al Franken, I thought the only one who believed blow jobs are "sick things" is my wife.

If you would like an apology for this bad joke, the line forms in my inbox.

By  Hammer, at 1:46 PM  

Post a Comment

<< Home