• Feed RSS
There was an error in this gadget
0

--
Thanks for being part of "PoliticalForum" at Google Groups.
For options & help see http://groups.google.com/group/PoliticalForum
 
* Visit our other community at http://www.PoliticalForum.com/
* It's active and moderated. Register and vote in our polls.
* Read the latest breaking news, and more.

Sunday, December 11, 2011
Newt Gingrich: Demagogue, Pseudointellectual
Posted by Sheldon Richman at 6:59 AM
Updated December 12

Newt Gingrich says the Palestinian people were invented. That's very funny coming from a man who has reinvented himself a few times in his life. We didn't need more evidence of Gingrich's status as a rank demagogue and pseudointellectual, but he's furnished it anyway.

Gingrich, in his typically arrogant manner, says this:
And I think that we've had an invented Palestinian people, who are in fact Arabs, and were historically part of the Arab community. And they had a chance to go many places.
By "chance to go many places" he means that while being expelled from their homes by Zionist/Israeli forces in 1947-48, they were free to relocate in any Arab country they chose. If I were to mimic Gingrich's style, I'd say that's a pro-FOUND-ly racist statement. Since these people are generic Arabs, why should it matter that someone else decides that they may no longer remain in Palestine where they and their families have lived and worked for a thousand or more years? (In the early twentieth century, incidentally, leading Zionist activists and scholars thought the Palestinians Arabs were descendants of the ancient Hebrews.)

We could as easily say:
And I think that we've had an invented Pennsylvanian people, who are in fact Americans, and were historically part of the American community. And they had a chance to go many places.
Even if we concede, contrary to the evidence, that Palestinian consciousness is a rather late development, so what? It would not be the first time that oppression of a group of people has forged group consciousness. Indeed, Theodor Herzl, the founder of the Zionist movement, was an assimilated Jew in Austria until the trial of Alfred Dreyfus in France. Herzl's response to that spectacle was to say, in effect: It's the anti-Semites who make us Jews.

In other words, Gingrich makes no sense when he suggests, as he did at the December 10 debate, that since the Arabs of Palestine didn't call themselves Palestinians until the 1970s, their uprooting from the land was perfectly okay. How does that follow?

On the particular historical question of Palestinian consciousness, Wikipedia is instructive. Also see Jeremy Sapienza's blog post on the subject. And here's something Gingrich might want to ponder: the dialect known as Palestinian Arabic. The invented people have their own language!

Here's what the Encyclopedia Brittanica has to say:

Although the Arabs of Palestine had been creating and developing a Palestinian identity for about 200 years, the idea that Palestinians form a distinct people is relatively recent. The Arabs living in Palestine had never had a separate state. Until the establishment of Israel, the term Palestinian was used by Jews and foreigners to describe the inhabitants of Palestine and had only begun to be used by the Arabs themselves at the turn of the 20th century; at the same time, most saw themselves as part of the larger Arab or Muslim community. The Arabs of Palestine began widely using the term Palestinian starting in the pre-World War I period to indicate the nationalist concept of a Palestinian people. But after 1948­and even more so after 1967­for Palestinians themselves the term came to signify not only a place of origin but, more importantly, a sense of a shared past and future in the form of a Palestinian state. [Emphasis added.]

Not to pile on, but in 1921 -- more than 50 years before the Palestinian people were supposedly invented -- something called the Syrian-Palestinian Congress met "to influence the terms of the proposed League of Nations mandate over the region." The word Palestine (or a form of it) goes back to ancient times.

As the Washington Post's fact-checker put it:

But Gingrich's claim that "Palestinian" did not become a common term until 1977 is bizarre. The very [1921] League of Nations mandate that he mentions was called "The British Mandate for Palestine." The text of the declaration mentions the word "Palestine" 45 times and "Palestinian" twice.

Speaking of inventing people, Gingrich might pick up Shlomo Sand's excellent book, The Invention of the Jewish People. Sand, a professor history at Tel Aviv University, shows that most national groups were essentially invented.

See Richard Silverstein's excellent commentary.

Here's the video of Gingrich's balderdash.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=dHWJWJocD6A

Those who think Palestine was a "land without a people" before Israel, should watch this video.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=JGBoGKPZlQE


http://sheldonfreeassociation.blogspot.com/2011/12/newt-gingrich-demagogue.html
0

 





 


--
Thanks for being part of "PoliticalForum" at Google Groups.
For options & help see http://groups.google.com/group/PoliticalForum
 
* Visit our other community at http://www.PoliticalForum.com/
* It's active and moderated. Register and vote in our polls.
* Read the latest breaking news, and more.
0






 


--
Thanks for being part of "PoliticalForum" at Google Groups.
For options & help see http://groups.google.com/group/PoliticalForum
 
* Visit our other community at http://www.PoliticalForum.com/
* It's active and moderated. Register and vote in our polls.
* Read the latest breaking news, and more.
0

 




 


--
Thanks for being part of "PoliticalForum" at Google Groups.
For options & help see http://groups.google.com/group/PoliticalForum
 
* Visit our other community at http://www.PoliticalForum.com/
* It's active and moderated. Register and vote in our polls.
* Read the latest breaking news, and more.
0

 




 


--
Thanks for being part of "PoliticalForum" at Google Groups.
For options & help see http://groups.google.com/group/PoliticalForum
 
* Visit our other community at http://www.PoliticalForum.com/
* It's active and moderated. Register and vote in our polls.
* Read the latest breaking news, and more.
0
http://content.usatoday.com/communities/onpolitics/post/2011/12/newt-gingrich-mormon-mitt-romney-/1

it's ok for Newt to demonize muslims but not ok for one of his
employees to disparage a mormon

--
Thanks for being part of "PoliticalForum" at Google Groups.
For options & help see http://groups.google.com/group/PoliticalForum

* Visit our other community at http://www.PoliticalForum.com/
* It's active and moderated. Register and vote in our polls.
* Read the latest breaking news, and more.

People of Walmart The Music Video. 

Ya knew it was coming. 



--
Thanks for being part of "PoliticalForum" at Google Groups.
For options & help see http://groups.google.com/group/PoliticalForum
 
* Visit our other community at http://www.PoliticalForum.com/
* It's active and moderated. Register and vote in our polls.
* Read the latest breaking news, and more.
0
Oh Teddy. If it wasn't for the Internet, most people would never know. They certainly don't teach you this in school.
http://bit.ly/u6TTDm

0

"Since U.S. soldiers have begun fighting in Iraq and Afghanistan, our freedoms have been eviscerated. First it was the Patriot Act and the TSA. And now the U.S. government claims the power and the right to intern indefinitely anyone – including American citizens – anywhere in the world, including on American soil and to kill anyone – including American citizens – anywhere in the world, including on American soil. Just ask José Padilla. Just ask Anwar al-Awlaki. Oh, never mind, he's dead. He was killed, along with his sixteen-year-old son, by Predator drone strike."

A Budding Red-State Fascist
by Laurence M. Vance

Madeleine McAulay is, by her own admission, a one-of-a-kind, politics-obsessed teenager, a teenage political maverick, a common-sense conservative, and a supporter of Sarah Palin. But she is also a budding red-state fascist.

Madeleine blogs at Faith Hope & Politics. Her upcoming book, The Makings of a Political Maverick, is "a key into the intriguing mind of a teenage, Conservative." It is "a reflection of a young life that is so engulfed in politics."

I hate to pick on a sixteen-year-old girl. She is clearly far superior in intelligence than most of the kids her age that I had the misfortune of "teaching" when I taught high school. I would never have noticed her website had not a reader of my recent Veteran's Day article directed me to her "tribute to American Soldiers, past and present, in honor of Veteran's Day on 11/11/11" called " Thank You Soldiers, Past and Present," as well as an earlier post of hers called " Dear American Soldiers."

Poor Madeleine didn't have a chance. In introducing her Veteran's Day tribute she says: "Thank you to all of those who have served. I would like to especially thank, my Mom's Parents, my Dad's Dad, my Dad, and my Uncle Jerry for their service." No wonder she is a budding red-state fascist.

In the middle of her "Dear American Soldiers" post, Madeleine quotes this poem from the site Military-Money-Matters.com:

It Is the Soldier
It is the Soldier, not the minister
Who has given us freedom of religion.
It is the Soldier, not the reporter
Who has given us freedom of the press.
It is the Soldier, not the poet
Who has given us freedom of speech.
It is the Soldier, not the campus organizer
Who has given us freedom to protest.
It is the Soldier, not the lawyer
Who has given us the right to a fair trial.
It is the Soldier, not the politician
Who has given us the right to vote.
It is the Soldier who salutes the flag,
Who serves beneath the flag,
And whose coffin is draped by the flag,
Who allows the protester to burn the flag.

This is too much for even the editor of Military-Money-Matters.com, who comments at the beginning of his explanation of the poem's authorship:

There are blogs and comments across the internet debating the content of the poem, some picking it apart by attempting to apply the words literally. Sadly, those who do so will never understand the true meaning of the poem – that without our military members willing to defend them, those freedoms we cherish would quickly disappear.

So, while technically soldiers do not "give" us those freedoms, they do guarantee them. Those types of people just will never "get it," at least not until it's too late, and then they'll wonder what happened, and why the military didn't stop it.

But do U.S. soldiers even guarantee these things? Of course they don't. No U.S. solider stationed in Germany, Japan, or South Korea is defending or guaranteeing our freedoms. No U.S. soldier fighting in Iraq or Afghanistan is protecting or guaranteeing our rights.

Since U.S. soldiers have begun fighting in Iraq and Afghanistan, our freedoms have been eviscerated. First it was the Patriot Act and the TSA. And now the U.S. government claims the power and the right to intern indefinitely anyone – including American citizens – anywhere in the world, including on American soil and to kill anyone – including American citizens – anywhere in the world, including on American soil. Just ask José Padilla. Just ask Anwar al-Awlaki. Oh, never mind, he's dead. He was killed, along with his sixteen-year-old son, by Predator drone strike.

Is there anyone in Iraq who wanted to take away our freedom of religion? Is there anyone in Afghanistan who wanted to take away our freedom of the press? Is there anyone in Pakistan who wanted to take away our freedom of speech? Is there anyone in Yemen who wanted to take away our freedom to protest? Is there anyone in Iran who wants to take away our right to a fair trial? Is there anyone anywhere who wants to take away our right to vote?

According to then CIA director and now Secretary of Defense Leon Panetta, there may be fewer than 50 al Qaeda fighters in Afghanistan. Suppose they all hated our freedom of religion, freedom of the press, freedom of speech, and freedom to protest. Suppose they also hated our rights to a fair trial and to vote. Is that worth 1,800 more dead U.S. soldiers? Why am I, who supposedly hates all things military, the one who is concerned about the senseless deaths of American troops?

It is the U.S. government that we need to be more concerned about taking away our freedom of religion, freedom of the press, freedom of speech, freedom to protest, right to a fair trial, and right to vote than the government or the people of Iraq, Afghanistan, Pakistan, Iran, Venezuela, Cuba, Yemen, Syria, or North Korea. James Madison was right: "If tyranny and oppression come to this land, it will be in the guise of fighting a foreign enemy."

What really gets me upset at those adults who have influenced Madeleine are her remarks about Ron Paul that she made in commenting on the CNN Republican debate: "Ron Paul had a decent debate. He made great points regarding health care and economic prosperity, but when it came to Foreign Policy I couldn't disagree more." This reminds me of a comment I saw at the end of an article recently. Someone had posted that their ideal candiate would have the foreign policy views of Newt Gringrich and the views of Ron Paul on everything else. Sorry Madeleine, but militarism, imperialism, and foreign wars are inimical to liberty on the domestic front and foster American fascism.

http://lewrockwell.com/vance/vance270.html
0

Blue Angels Budget Blues
by Laurence M. Vance, December 13, 2011

The Navy's Blue Angels flight-demonstration team is in trouble. And not because their commander resigned earlier this year after flying his F/A-18 Hornet below minimum altitude at an air show in Virginia and causing a month-long safety stand-down.

Headquartered at the Pensacola Naval Air Station, the Blue Angels have been flying and thrilling audiences for more than 60 years. The team began after World War II with the desire of Adm. Chester Nimitz to maintain peacetime support for naval aviation and highlight the Navy and Marines, from which the Blue Angels gets its pilots, for potential recruits who didn't live near a Naval base.

The Air Force has a similar demonstration team called the Thunderbirds, while the Army has the Golden Knights parachute team.

The Blues, as the Blue Angels squadron is known, made 70 performances at 35 locations around the United States in 2011 during a show season that runs from March through November. More than 100,000 people attended the recent Blue Angels end-of-season show at the Pensacola Naval Air Station. The Navy says that about 11 million people each year watch the Blue Angels' six blue and gold jets twist, turn, drop, and climb in perfect formation for a carefully choreographed 45-minute show. As one who lived for many years in Pensacola, I can testify that seeing the Blue Angels fly is impressive.

However, all of this comes at a price. There have been 26 Blue Angels pilots who have been killed in air-show or training accidents, most recently in 2007 when a pilot lost control of his plane and crashed during an air show in South Carolina. The other cost is that borne by American taxpayers. The Pentagon's budget for the Blue Angels is $37 million.

But the mission of the Blue Angels is purely promoting naval aviation and recruiting instead of actually contributing to national defense, so some have begun to call for the squadron's elimination because of the budget deficit and potential cuts in military spending.

Laura Peterson, a spokeswoman for Taxpayers for Common Sense, says the money could be better spent on other programs. Some readers of the Air Force Times newspaper, obviously read mainly by current and former members of the Air Force, recently listed eliminating the Blue Angels and similar programs as one way to cut defense spending.

Others intimately connected with the Navy naturally disagree.

Capt. Greg McWherter, the Blue Angels' commander, claims that the Blues fill "a vital national security role by improving morale, helping with recruiting and presenting a public face for the nation's 500,000 sailors and Marines." He sees Blue Angels performances as inspiring young people to join the military and thus ensuring "that the Navy and the Marine Corps is strong 10 to 15 years from now." Ray Davis, the U.S. Navy secretary, says the Blue Angels are important because they showcase the "incredible skill level of U.S. military." The Blues are "ambassadors for not just the Navy but for [sic] the entire American military across this country and around the world." Rep. Jeff Miller, whose district includes the Pensacola Naval Air Station and who is on the House Armed Services Committee, points to the popularity of the Blue Angels as proof that the program will be kept alive: "You can ask the hundreds of thousands of people who come out each weekend and see them fly and know they aren't going anywhere."

The potential cuts to the defense budget are due to "sequestration" because the Congressional Joint Select Committee on Deficit Reduction (the so-called Supercommittee) failed to come to an agreement on how to reduce the federal budget deficit by $1.5 trillion over ten years. That is only $150 billion a year, split between security and nonsecurity programs, but exempting the Cerberus of the welfare state: Social Security, Medicaid, and Medicare.

The Budget Control Act of 2011 mandates that if the Supercommittee fails to specify spending cuts, then a cut of $1.2 trillion over ten years will automatically take place. That is $120 billion a year. Any idiot except a member of Congress could cut $120 billion a year in federal spending for ten years without thinking about it for more than ten minutes. By anyone's estimate, the U.S. government is spending more than $10 billion a month on the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan. There is your $120 billion a year. How hard was that?

But it turns out that the cuts to the defense budget are not real cuts at all; they are reductions in the rate of spending increases. Federal spending and federal debt are both still forecast to grow at a rate faster than the U.S. economy.

As the freshman, junior senator from Kentucky, Rand Paul, recently explained,
The interesting thing is there will be no cuts in military spending. This may surprise some people, but there will be no cuts in military spending because we're only cutting proposed increases. If we do nothing, military spending goes up 23 percent over 10 years. If we sequester the money, it will still go up 16 percent. So spending is still rising under any of these plans. In fact, if you look at both alternatives, spending is still going up. We're only cutting proposed increases in spending....
Defense spending will go up $100 billion over ten years even if we sequester $600 billion, because the curve of spending in our country is going up at about 7.5 percent a year. All spending goes up.

His father, Rep. Ron Paul (R-Tex.), has long called for real cuts not in defense spending, but in offense spending, which is what the budget of the Department of Defense is mostly spent on.

The war party, that is, the Republican Party, is livid over the proposed "cuts" to the Pentagon's budget.

Mitt Romney says the "cuts" are "undermining troop capacity, delaying the building of aircraft carriers and cutting the capacity of the U.S. to defend itself." Senators John McCain (R-Ariz.) and Lindsey Graham (R-S.C.) ­ both members of the Senate Armed Services Committee ­ maintain that the "cuts" represent "a threat to the national security interests of the United States, and cannot be allowed to occur." The chairman of the House Armed Services Committee, Buck McKeon (R-Calif.), insisted that he would not be "the armed services chairman who presides over crippling our military." Sen. Pat Toomey (R-Penn.) ­ a member of the Supercommittee ­ wants to reconfigure the automatic spending cuts mandated by the Budget Control Act to prevent "cuts" to the defense budget.

But we have been this way before. Earlier this year it was reported by Defense News that Barack Obama wanted to "cut" defense spending by $400 billion by 2023. The aforementioned Buck McKeon ­ whose district includes Edwards Air Force Base and whose top two donors were Lockheed Martin and Northrup Grumman ­ expressed his opposition then as well: "I have grave concerns about the White House announcing a $400 billion cut to national security spending while our troops are fighting in three different theaters." I guess ending senseless foreign wars never occurred to him. But as it turns out, the $400 billion "cut" was a reduction only in the rate of growth: "The goal will be to hold growth in the defense base budget below inflation, which would save $400 billion by 2023," said the White House.

And what is this nonsense about cutting spending by $1.2 trillion over ten years or $400 billion by 2023? Politicians always talk in terms of other years after the next fiscal year because they want to make their numbers look bigger. But it is ludicrous to talk about anything that will happen in ten years, in the year 2023, or in any other year after the next fiscal year. The present Congress cannot bind any future Congress to do anything. A politician might as well say that he plans to cut $100 trillion from the federal budget by 2095.

The very heart and soul of conservatism is not libertarianism, as Ronald Reagan once claimed it was; the very heart and soul of conservatism is war and militarism. The Blue Angels have no need to worry as long as Republicans continue to equate reductions in the rate of increases in the defense budget with cuts that threaten national security.

http://www.fff.org/comment/com1112m.asp

*This video is the deal changer!* "You Like Ron Paul, Except on Foreign Policy " Help this go viral!
Submitted by spacehabitats on Tue, 12/13/2011 - 23:38

HonestPresident2012 has given us a powerful weapon.

This is the video I have been waiting for.

How many times have we heard, "I agree with Ron Paul about everything except his foreign policy."? Or "He's soft on defense?" Or "He would let the radical Islamists take over"?

How many times have we wished for a video that would answer those objections that was clear, concise, authoritative, simple, logical, emotionally compelling, and poetic; with music and editing as polished as its message?

HonestPresident2012 took an already excellent video and has made it into a classic. I was literally moved to tears.

You Like Ron Paul, Except on Foreign Policy

http://youtu.be/I8NhRPo0WAo

http://www.dailypaul.com/192613/this-video-is-the-deal-changer-urgent-message-from-the-troops-revised-help-this-go-viral


New post on Doctor Bulldog & Ronin

Rabbi Joshua Hammerman Predicts That if Tebow Wins the Super Bowl, Emboldened Christians Will be Burning Mosques, Bashing Gays, and Indiscriminately Banishing Immigrants

by doctorbulldog

It's libtarded morons like Rabbi Hammerman that give Jews a bad name:

My Tim Tebow Problem
Rabbi Joshua Hammerman - Jewish Week Online

I've got a Tim Tebow problem.

I want to root for the guy, but I'm afraid of what will happen if the hulky Denver Bronco quarterback continues to pull off what is fast becoming the Greatest Gridiron Story Ever Told.  Since taking over as starting quarterback earlier this season, the Heisman winning national champion from the University of Florida has been winning consistently and dramatically, in the final minutes of the game or overtime, relying on powerful legs rather than his infamously erratic arm and confounding skeptical fans along with the Bronco management, who, it is said, were hoping he would fail.

A poster boy of the Christian right, Tebow steadfastly thanks Jesus after every game and, while in college, often inscribed biblical messages on his eye paint. Homeschooled in Florida, this child of missionaries turned down his selection as a Playboy All American because it was, well, Playboy.  His trademark prayerful touchdown celebration (imagine Rodin's "Thinker" on bended knee, or your grandfather davening Tachanun with a football) has become a verb.  Google "tebowing" and you'll find 84 million hits, including lots of YouTube parodies. Tebow's mother, a Baptist missionary, became comatose during her pregnancy and was saved by drugs that nearly killed the fetus.  Doctors anticipated a stillbirth and recommended termination to protect her life, but Tim's mother refused to abort.  Trumpeting that decision, mother and son appeared in commercials for "Focus on the Family" during this past season's Super Bowl.

Now tiny Tim has grown and is on track to possibly appear in this season's Super Bowl – on the field – and that is what scares me.

In this country, nothing, not even God, is more popular than football.   Even in the wake of a summer long labor dispute, 23 of the 25 most watched TV programs this fall have been NFL games.  When you combine the religion that is football with the religion that is religion, the mix can be dangerously flammable.  The NFL ratings rise has been fueled in part by Tebow's legions of faithful followers, as well as by those simply curious to see how this implausible morality tale plays out.

[...]
Into the middle of it all rides Tebow.  Absolutely confident that God is on his side, he comes across as a humbler version of the biblical Joseph, who, in this week's Torah portion, audaciously lays claim to being the Chosen One, and then goes out and proves it.  Tebow's sanctimonious God-talk has led even pious peers like Kurt Warner to suggest that he cool it. Joseph could have used the same coaching.

If Tebow wins the Super Bowl, against all odds, it will buoy his faithful, and emboldened faithful can do insane things, like burning mosques, bashing gays and indiscriminately banishing immigrants.  While America has become more inclusive since Jerry Falwell's first political forays, a Tebow triumph could set those efforts back considerably.

[...]

doctorbulldog | 13 December, 2011 at 9:51 pm | Categories: Insanity, Liberals, Religion, Sports | URL: http://wp.me/p1NPg-7tF

Comment    See all comments

Unsubscribe or change your email settings at Manage Subscriptions.

Trouble clicking? Copy and paste this URL into your browser:
http://doctorbulldog.wordpress.com/2011/12/13/rabbi-joshua-hammerman-predicts-that-if-tebow-wins-the-super-bowl-emboldened-christians-will-be-burning-mosques-bashing-gays-and-indiscriminately-banishing-immigrants/

Thanks for flying with WordPress.com


--
Thanks for being part of "PoliticalForum" at Google Groups.
For options & help see http://groups.google.com/group/PoliticalForum
 
* Visit our other community at http://www.PoliticalForum.com/
* It's active and moderated. Register and vote in our polls.
* Read the latest breaking news, and more.


New post on actjonesboroar

"All-American Muslim" Loses 64 Advertisers

by burkasrugly

Fellow Infidels,

I wanted to let you know that currently over 60 advertisers have pulled their ads from the Muslim propaganda show "All-American Muslim."

Can you imagine the frustration of those Muslims who have been taught from conception that because they are Muslims that they are superior to mere infidels?  It must really gall them that they are not getting their way...that infidels, Western Christian infidels at that, have not let them bully their way into American living rooms with their taqiyya-filled television program.

Here is an excerpt of the story that can be found on ColorLines.  It is titled "Group Says Lowe's Is One of 64 Companies to Pull Ads From 'All-American Muslim'."

The conservative Christian group  that's claiming responsibility for home improvement chain Lowe's  pulling their ads from the reality show "All American Muslim" says there are 64 other companies that have cancelled their ad buys for the show as a result of their e-mail campaign.

McDonalds, Amazon and Bank of America are among the companies the Florida Family Association (FFA) says they've targeted to get their commercials off the reality tv show "All American Muslim." Lowe's was the first to make headlines because they're the only  company to confirm they canceled ad buys as a result of the  conservative group's campaign.

Give the Florida Family Association a big round of applause.  Keep up the good work.

Until next time,

Burkasrugly

Comment    See all comments

Unsubscribe or change your email settings at Manage Subscriptions.

Trouble clicking? Copy and paste this URL into your browser:
http://actjonesboroar.wordpress.com/2011/12/14/all-american-muslim-loses-64-advertisers/

Thanks for flying with WordPress.com


--
Thanks for being part of "PoliticalForum" at Google Groups.
For options & help see http://groups.google.com/group/PoliticalForum
 
* Visit our other community at http://www.PoliticalForum.com/
* It's active and moderated. Register and vote in our polls.
* Read the latest breaking news, and more.
0


New post on Fellowship of the Minds

Hump-Day Santa Funny

by Dr. Eowyn

H/t beloved fellow Tina.

~Eowyn

Dr. Eowyn | December 14, 2011 at 3:00 am | Categories: Humor | URL: http://wp.me/pKuKY-baQ

Comment    See all comments

Unsubscribe or change your email settings at Manage Subscriptions.

Trouble clicking? Copy and paste this URL into your browser:
http://fellowshipofminds.wordpress.com/2011/12/14/hump-day-funny/

Thanks for flying with WordPress.com


--
Thanks for being part of "PoliticalForum" at Google Groups.
For options & help see http://groups.google.com/group/PoliticalForum
 
* Visit our other community at http://www.PoliticalForum.com/
* It's active and moderated. Register and vote in our polls.
* Read the latest breaking news, and more.