rising up out of the back seat-nuh

Only because SK edited out the fact that his post said "statan". Without it the joke meant nothing. Prick.

Dear Diary, If I were a betting man, I'd say SK was Johnson. But I'm not, for legal reasons Sneakily chave.

Scott Kieth is the Randy Orton of this board. Promising new talent, but he risks a backlash from being featured too heavily too soon.

Take it or leave it. I could downgrade you to a *. I wonder what's saving me from negative stars.... You used to have a cool avatar. Floating heads = ratings~!

Hell, she couldn't finish off Warhol, no way she's taking me out.

Hey, is that a swipe at me and Ripper? It's not our fault we're dumb...

That was a gratuitous bump...

CWM: So, Marney, I'm a manly man. Wanna fuck? Marney: It is now technically feasible to reproduce without the aid of males (or, for that matter, females) and to produce only females. We must begin immediately to do so. Retaining the male has not even the dubious purpose of reproduction. The male is a biological accident: the Y (male) gene is an incomplete X (female) gene, that is, it has an incomplete set of chromosomes. In other words, the male is an incomplete female, a walking abortion, aborted at the gene stage. To be male is to be deficient, emotionally limited; maleness is a deficiency disease and males are emotional cripples. The male is completely egocentric, trapped inside himself, incapable of empathizing or identifying with others, or love, friendship, affection of tenderness. He is a completely isolated unit, incapable of rapport with anyone. His responses are entirely visceral, not cerebral; his intelligence is a mere tool in the services of his drives and needs; he is incapable of mental passion, mental interaction; he can't relate to anything other than his own physical sensations. He is a half-dead, unresponsive lump, incapable of giving or receiving pleasure or happiness; consequently, he is at best an utter bore, an inoffensive blob, since only those capable of absorption in others can be charming. He is trapped in a twilight zone halfway between humans and apes, and is far worse off than the apes because, unlike the apes, he is capable of a large array of negative feelings -- hate, jealousy, contempt, disgust, guilt, shame, doubt -- and moreover, he is aware of what he is and what he isn't. Although completely physical, the male is unfit even for stud service. Even assuming mechanical proficiency, which few men have, he is, first of all, incapable of zestfully, lustfully, tearing off a piece, but instead is eaten up with guilt, shame, fear and insecurity, feelings rooted in male nature, which the most enlightened training can only minimize; second, the physical feeling he attains is next to nothing; and third, he is not empathizing with his partner, but is obsessed with how he's doing, turning in an A performance, doing a good plumbing job. To call a man an animal is to flatter him; he's a machine, a walking dildo. It's often said that men use women. Use them for what? Surely not pleasure. Eaten up with guilt, shame, fears and insecurities and obtaining, if he's lucky, a barely perceptible physical feeling, the male is, nonetheless, obsessed with screwing; he'll swim through a river of snot, wade nostril-deep through a mile of vomit, if he thinks there'll be a friendly pussy awaiting him. He'll screw a woman he despises, any snaggle-toothed hag, and furthermore, pay for the opportunity. Why? Relieving physical tension isn't the answer, as masturbation suffices for that. It's not ego satisfaction; that doesn't explain screwing corpses and babies. Completely egocentric, unable to relate, empathize or identify, and filled with a vast, pervasive, diffuse sexuality, the male is pyschically passive. He hates his passivity, so he projects it onto women, defines the make as active, then sets out to prove that he is (`prove that he is a Man'). His main means of attempting to prove it is screwing (Big Man with a Big Dick tearing off a Big Piece). Since he's attempting to prove an error, he must `prove' it again and again. Screwing, then, is a desperate compulsive, attempt to prove he's not passive, not a woman; but he is passive and does want to be a woman. Being an incomplete female, the male spends his life attempting to complete himself, to become female. He attempts to do this by constantly seeking out, fraternizing with and trying to live through an fuse with the female, and by claiming as his own all female characteristics -- emotional strength and independence, forcefulness, dynamism, decisiveness, coolness, objectivity, assertiveness, courage, integrity, vitality, intensity, depth of character, grooviness, etc -- and projecting onto women all male traits -- vanity, frivolity, triviality, weakness, etc. It should be said, though, that the male has one glaring area of superiority over the female -- public relations. (He has done a brilliant job of convincing millions of women that men are women and women are men). The male claim that females find fulfillment through motherhood and sexuality reflects what males think they'd find fulfilling if they were female. Women, in other words, don't have penis envy; men have pussy envy. When the male accepts his passivity, defines himself as a woman (males as well as females think men are women and women are men), and becomes a transvestite he loses his desire to screw (or to do anything else, for that matter; he fulfills himself as a drag queen) and gets his dick chopped off. He then achieves a continuous diffuse sexual feeling from `being a woman'. Screwing is, for a man, a defense against his desire to be female CWM: Oooh, kinky!

You're a dumb fuck. That's a proper reason.

I don't like you because you're a dumb fuck. Can I go on the list?

Well, I got turned on reading this thread. I've got a semi.

I'll be happy to oblige you, then. People with the most farcically stupid ideas on politics imaginable, almost to the point I think they're being deliberately retarded 1. Cartman 2. Frank Zappa Mask There you go. I knew THAT would help get me on a list eventually I don't have shitty music taste...you don't even know who or what I like at all smartass. Also, my views on pilotics are simple. Our government sucks, it's completely corrupt, and the President is nothing more than a figure, like say the Queen of England. But what does that have to do with pilots? I cant type Pilots can't type?

I go to the pub for 4 hours, and this is what happens? You stupid, stupid fucks.

Rob's probably too stoned. "Whoa, cool move dude. Where did you learn that from?" "Er, it's your move Rob" "NO WAY! Stop messing with my mind man" ::Rob goes off to hide in a dark corner::

That post raises questions I really don't want answered...

He didn't steal it when Rob was in WWE, he stole it when he was in ECW.

But Shane is a wrestler right now, for better or worse. And seeing as the VT gets him a pop (ad is rarely seen as an RVD move anymore by the marks) why shouldn't he use it? Besides, he's not using it every week on television to show up Van Dam.

Here we disagree.. Have you never done something you shouldn't have done under pressure? Even when you were younger?

Actually, Shane has used the Macho Man elbow drop as his finisher since about 1999. Yeah, but Shane's also used the "Coast To Coast" as a finishing move since 2000. It's what won him the match against Vince at WMX8, and would have beaten Kane if the ref hadn't been out, so the fans can view it as the end of a match. So, since he's used it two times, winning with it once, it's now his to use? Does that mean the Pedigree was Owen Hart's finisher in 1998? No, but he's used it as a high profile finisher in two very big matches, so fans are gonna associate it with him as much as the Macho Man elbow drop (which I can't remember him finishing with in ages). He beat Bisch with it. I think he used it to eliminate Show from winner take all Bisch is a non wrestler. It hardly builds up the legitimacy of the move. Then your Vince example must be thrown out No, because Vince is built up as a legitimate threat in his matches, and particularly in that one against Shane. Bischoff, on the other hand, is treated as a Karate loving fool. Nobody ever saw him as a serious threat to Shane.

WHY THE BLUE BLAZING HELL NOT? So anytime anyone is subject to any amount of stress, no one should be allowed to criticise her actions? Funny, we put soldiers on trial for war crimes. Or are you claiming that SNSD was under more stress than soldiers in war zones, and thus had relatively diminished capacity? There's a difference between being chased, and your instinct kicking in and not happening to look at a licence plate, and war crimes. Not your best analogy there. In my view, you shouldn't flame SSD for the way she acted under pressure. Her actions after this (such as when she got onto the board), on the other hand, are harder to defend.

So, she should be forced to have a child she doesn't want, yeah? In my view, she shouldn't be having that kid. If that means she gets an abortion, so be it.

Acting the wrong way in a situation happens to the best of us. It's wrong to flame SSD for acting in the way she did because during her "ordeal" her instinct was not to look at the plate. You can't help the way you act in situations like that: instinct just kicks in, and it's unfair to put her down over something ahe has no control over.

Howard Dean has also registered. Yay!

I still think that was inexcusable, and I can't understand how that was physically impossible to do. She said she was on 163 N and they turned onto 52 E. Correct me if I'm wrong, but doesn't that mean that the other car went at right angles to her? And doesn't that mean that the license plate would have been PERFECTLY VISIBLE for an extraordinary amount of time as the Expedition/Explorer/Navigator/Escalade (Jesus Christ, they don't all look that similar) turned towards the exit and then went up the ramp, as I presume there were few if any other cars on the road at that hour (past 2 in the morning)? Hey, I'm not defending it, I'm just saying it's not inexcusible. She didn't get the number. She was probably too worried about being run off the road or something. Hindsight is 20/20. Your main problem is with her and the way she's fawned over, not the situation.

That was Oscar Wilde, right?