Recent Activity
Search BL Rag
Powered by Squarespace
About This Site

The BL RAG is dedicated to the idea of free expression, thus we welcome and encourage reader  commentary on current events and issues, music, sports, or other topics of interest, no matter what one's political leanings or worldview.


Site Management:

Front Page Section Editors: Machiavelli, Skinnydipinacid, and Redbeard

Miscellanea Editor: Zoy Clem

Poetry Editor: Lenny

Music Editors: see schedule below


Site Editors: Skinnydipinacid and Zoy Clem

Maintenance Man: Master Admin Dude


Eric Olsen, Fornax, GrayRider, Winston, Jimmmco, and WesMorgan1


KRAG Music Section Schedule:

Sunday - Jgeagle5

Monday - Rhythm & Truth

Tuesday - Machiavelli

Wednesday - GrayRider

Thursday - Skinny

Friday - Fornax

Saturday - Zoy Clem

On-call - Schwabman


Early Father's Day Thread

[ahem] Just in case anyone I know is reading this, and needs an idea.



Hillary Clinches Dem Nomination

Bernie fans are ticked too.

Can't say I blame them though.   They've been stuck listening to AP reports for more than 24 hours affirming Hillary had secured enough of the remaining super delegate votes to win, in turn quelling the Bernie votes, before rubbing their noses in it 1/2 hr before the polls closed with her victory speech.

That was a laughable moment too.  Her, talking about secretive money, and Wall Street brokering.   Yeah, we get it... you loaded your stump speech with Bernie Sanders talking points in hopes of attracting his supporters, but what you don't understand is that it's laughable when you do it.  

I bet this guy's happy though, and that's all that really matters:

... an oldie, but a goodie.


Conflict of Interest? Bias?  NAH!!!

The judge in the Trump University case has been happy to play the victim to Trump's stupid comment about him being a "Mexican."  Trump's fat mouth got him in hot water, but the facts emerging indicate that he wasn't far off the mark, if he had only left out the "Mexican" part.

Apparently the judge is hardly a shining light of objectivity, since he is associated with the self-identified racist group La Raza, even aiding an illegal alien to get a scholarship.

So, on one side we have Trump shooting off his big mouth, and on the other side we have a judge whose rancid associations call into question his fitness to hear this case, plus the megabucks (close to a million) paid to the Clintons by the law firm representing the plaintiffs.  To follow the smarmy media narrative, a big mouth is far worse than judicial malfeasance and legal conflicts of interest.      


Extended Weekend Open Thread

Seems like it's been a while since I did a "meh, who cares, let's just put something up post", but sadly this won't be one of those.  In fact, I might get wordy.   It's been that kind of week.

Before I begin, I just want to start by saying... I like my new Senator:

So good it almost makes you feel dirty.    I'm guessing a vast majority of frantic left-wingers felt the same way today (only without the "good" aspect) after seeing this epic tweet-blooper from MSNBC:

Unfortunately the tweet was quickly ruined with the appearance of Obama...  much like the economy, our nation's border, and every woman's public bathroom in America before it.  

OFF TOPIC:   Since Bill Clinton was once considered the country's first black president... Does that mean Obama is our nation's first transgender President?   (I'm thinking legacy)

Speaking of the Commander in Chief, did you see he's finally going after ISIS?   Only, not in the way YOU might think, by, you know...  killing them.   No, instead he's looking for ways to PROSECUTE them.   What a humanitarian.   Nevermind the growing trail of dead, innocent bodies left along the way.

Oh, and he told reporters in Japan he'd take one more question in his press conference today...   unfortunately for him it was a question about Prison Granny's growing email scandal.

Prison Granny went into full damage control mode Thursday after this news broke:

... Oh, and her aides' depositions are being kept private.  

Is THIS bad? 

Hillary defended herself saying is would not "affect either the campaign or my presidency.” She also noted that her use of private email was not unprecedented (even though Collin Powell, Condaleeza Rice and others didn't openly lie, delete emails, nor were they uncooperative with inspectors):

“I have turned over all of my emails. No one else can say that," Clinton said. "I have been incredibly open about doing that.” 

About 32,000 emails were deleted before she "turned them all over".

If I was her opponent, I'd want to debate her again too.   I bet Sanders only wishes he'd have had the courage to take her on earlier in the race instead of skating around it.    Guess he'll have to settle for a charity debate with Trump (who clinched the GOP nomination b.t.w.) instead.   Maybe if they threw in a few hundred thousand dollars to the Clinon Foundation we could turn this into a threesome.   Just sayin'.

And almost lastly...  another sad, pathetic politican:  Sen Orrin Hatch.    He wasn't capable of just admitting that Republicans are going to do whatever it takes to block any Supreme Court nominee until after Obama is gone (and good riddance to him) and instead tried to take some phony noble route by issuing a statement via an Op-Ed that read:

“Like many of my Senate colleagues, I recently met with Chief Judge Merrick Garland, President Obama’s nominee to the Supreme Court. … Our meeting, however, does not change my conviction that the Senate should consider a Supreme Court nominee after this presidential election cycle"

One problem:  he hadn't met with Garland yet.   It was a draft that got accidentally published before the two had even had the opportunity to get acquainted.  SPOILER ALERT:  Garland didn't impress.

However, my vote for most ridiculous, idiotic, offensive pile(s) of oh-my-gawd-what-the-heck-is-that goes to the people of Tap 4 Fun... more pointedly the people behind their mobile MMO game "Invasion".   It's of the same mold as Game of War (remember that commercial?) and Mobile Strike (now sporting the Governator in its ads)

Well apparently this Invasion game (created by the company Tap 4 Fun) is looking for their own spokesperson, having seen the attention they've gained for their competition...  only they have decided to open it up to their players to, get this, VOTE on who their spokesperson should be out of a handful of candidates.

Today I got a message (in-game)... here's what it read:

Yes, they misspelled Keifer Sutherland's name... and no, I don't believe Baltimore Maryland is an actual person's name...  but they also included... Chris... KYLE!?  As in the Frog who's funeral was so notable that it had to be held at Cowboy Stadium Chris Kyle?!?!?   WHAT???!!!!!!  

The Facebook backlash has been fairly constant all day, and deservedly so.  Definitely biggest douches of the decade so far for either not knowing or (worse) knowing and finding it funny to put him in list of actors, a boxer (no idea what Mayweather has to do with a war game), an MMA fighter (ditto) and a city recently known for civil unrest thanks in part to their leftist State's Attorney that fell off the soapbox trying to make a name for herself.

This post is beginning to make me lose even more faith in humanity, so screw this, let's call it a weekend .  Enjoy the upcoming Memorial Day...   and don't forget to vote for Chris Kyle as a final "F-you" to Tap 4 Fun via their silly Facebook question (make sure you ask that all his proceeds as a spokeperson are paid in full to his family).




Hillary Clinton May Only Be Fooling Herself

I had to double-check the new talking point Hillary was spouting off today on Meet the Press, and how she's had 2 million more votes than Donald Trump so far.   I didn't think that was completely accurate, and she's been known to lie alot, so I felt the urge to dig into her claim.

Now I suppose you could round up 1.82 million votes to 2 million and hope it flies, but the issue Hillary (and for that matter... Democrats) needs to worry about are the numbers BEHIND those numbers.   The early primary votes were obviously dilluted down on the Republican side simply due to the number of candidates in the race.   That being said... the Repulican side still has close to 3 million more counted votes (25.87 million between just Trump, Cruz, Kasich and Rubio) than that of the Democrat candidates (22.94 million).

Clearly a weak talking point, but hey, when your campaign is struggling... struggle with it:

Okay, now that's just awful.   I'm sure granny camp thought a Venn graphic would be a hip, stylish way to show... well, whatever it is she's trying to say.   So in the spirit of Venn I thought I'd break another stat down in a similar manner (only mine would be done correctly):

(That's a problem for the left)




How NOT to Respond to Somebody Citing You as "the WORST Abuser of Women in U.S. Political History"

<= Just in case you were unsure of who the Democrat subject is

Now, there's good ways and bad ways to address a hot topic such as rape, an oval office b.j., repeated trips to a pedophile's island or even a sweetheart deal received by said pedophile (although I feel like I'm leaving out quite a few steamy accusations in this list)...  then there's the Clinton way:  with a smile and a pander, to all you folks out there, that are smart enough to figure it out on your own.

Well golly gee.  (video c/o CNN)

Energizer?  WHAT?!

Word of advice to the Clintons (not that I want them to actually take it, because I'd rather see them lose horribly in November)...  it MIGHT be a good idea to figure out a better way to address these accusations, because Trump is only getting started with the accusations against Slick Willy, and they're only going to get more brutal and frequent than this one tweet: 

Maybe it's just me, but if some crazy woman was out there claiming I raped her many years ago, then re-emerging on the political scene and smeering me (and my wife's campaign) STILL to this day (oh, and I was innocent ::wink wink::) I guarantee you I'd be out there defending my good name (assuming said hypothetical me had a "good name" to defend), but Bill Clinton has never really been one to defend himself against any of these accusations.  He instead opts to dodge and deflect, and the mainstream media has long been willing to oblige his deflections.  No, they'd rather dredge up even darker sludge on the Clinton's upcoming opponent (and failing) instead.

Nothing screams "we believe you" more than a dogged search for a bigger distraction.

Even some left-wing media outlets like MSNBC, HuffPo, Vox and many others have (despite the obvious up-front dismissals for political sake) consider many of the explicit stories more credible than some of the others (code for "well... shit"), and they've received countless interviews from the accusers, but never do they get a difinitive comment beyond a deflection or "not available to comment" from the Clinton camp.

Not that anybody would believe him anway:


New Thread, To Provide Room For...

...more of Hillary's lies.  So many, so little bandwidth.  Running out of space on the last thread. 


Nominating Hillary Would be a Democrat Disaster Simply to Protect the Status Quo*

I remember MY first time taking the SubwayNot my words.  Those are the words from the Sanders camp.  I would have used the title "trainwreck just waiting for the right time to derail".

In more ways than one Sanders is correct.   Hillary "Sniper Fire" Clinton (in my opinion) is baggage for the Democrat Party.  Her favorablility numbers were not all that impressive going into the 2016 primaries, but lately they've taken a bit of a nosedive, much to the credit of both Trump and Sanders.  

On top of that, she lies, or "conveniently misspeaks" (if one so prefers such a phrase) often, and tends to shift her position based on which way the poltical headwinds are blowing at the time in which her lips start moving.   She's branded herself from left, to moderate/centrist, to (so-called) progressive in a period of time that exceeds only half of my childrens' ages.  

Take coal mining for example.  That one stupid statement about putting them out of business (which she may or may not have even supported... since it's Hillary) has cost her West Virginia in the primary and will likely cost her those same states and then some in the general election vs Trump (Pennsylvania, Virginia, etc).   I'm actually surprised she hasn't come out saying "my history of supporting fossil fuels has been well documented" and tried to lie about always supporting them.  Still time I suppose.

Then there's the whole email/Clinton server thing.  Good grief almighty.  Illegality aside, she actually ran around saying she turned over 90-95%, before claiming "every" email (not of a personal nature ::wink wink::) on her personal server (which was destroyed) before the State Dept had insisted they'd actually received less than 1% of her emails, with Rep. Susan Brooks even pointing out an astonishing drop in Libya-related emails from prevous year 2011, to 2012 (leading up to the Benghazi attacks) and highlighted it as a "lack of interest" (if not a sign of obvious wrongdoing). 

... And don't even get me started on Benghazi.

The last two alone are enough to make your everyday American Joe leery of such an individual, but to ignore such toxicity levels and thrust said person into the deep end of a presidential election?   Well, now that's just reckless.   It's like drag racing to the cliff's edge.  Sanders is spot-on by calling them out on it.

Let's consider just SOME of the things Hillary has flip-flopped on (so far):

She opposed ethanol mandates prior to running for president in 2008 (ironically, they grow corn in Iowa ::wink wink::).

She opposed gay marriage (numerous times) prior to that same primary and supported the Defense of Marriage Act before she was against it (even went as far as rainbow-coloring her "H" logo).

She opposed NAFTA in 2008 as well, shortly after praising it as a boon to the economy.

She opposed raising the debt limit (voting 3 times not to) before "praying that common sense would make a comeback" and pass in 2014.   I suppose she gets folksy bonus points for praying.

She opposed the Keystone XL pipeline (finally, per the link) after the backlash she caused by saying she was inclined to support it.

She opposed raising payroll taxes until she starting "Feeling the Bern".

She opposed TPP before she was against it.

She supported Iran's ability to enrich uranium for civilian purposed, but then rejected the idea in 2014, prior to her help in ushering in Iran to the table in the recent deal (being heavily scrutinized as of late) by saying her team helped "set the table" for John Kerry's horrible negotiations.

I could go on...   Deportations of illegal immigrants, sanctuary cities, driver's licenses for illegals, her opinion of President Bashar al-Assad, the Cuba embargo, numerous free trade agreements, gun control, eductation reform, school choice, charter schools...  what difference at this point does it make?

She makes John Kerry look like an amateur flip-flopper.  She IS a bad candidate, and the Democrat/enablers that helped push her far into the lead over Sanders have to be feeling a little skittish as they watch him still in the race, supposedly defeated, yet still drawing crowds that any candidate would feel proud of.

Whether you love him, hate him, or find yourself somewhere in between, you have to admire Sanders and his tenacity.   He is still relevent in the race, and is in some ways doing harm to the "Crooked" Hillary Clinton, who would like nothing more than to wrap up her game of progressive charades and go back to pretending to be a moderate again.   Trying to out-progressive the bigger progressive is not going well for her and it's starting to look like it will affect her beyond securing the Democratic nod.

I'm staring to wonder:   If her numbers tank any further, should the White House just wrap up this email investigation, unleash all their dirt, and throw her in prison in hopes of a better on-deck candidate (be it Sanders or Biden)?

*For sake of potential scrutiny not a single Fox News/Trumpbart article was linked to in this post


Election Night / New Thread

Raise your hand in the air... . if you just don't care... about criminal indictmentsBecause new threads are fun.

So Trump is already being called the winner in West Virginia, but there's apparently a push to see Cruz re-enter the race if he wins in Nebraska.   So... we'll see how that goes (not holding my breathe).

Hillary however, not so certain.  Should be another nail-biting night for her.   She was ahead going into WV, but it also sounds like coal miners hate her, so you never know.

Maybe I'll follow up with results.

Maybe I won't.

We'll see.

:: Cheers ::



John Kasich's Laughable Exit

"I FINISHED 4TH... IN A 2-MAN RACE!!"To be perfectly frank...  I really wouldn't even be typing about this story had I not already stated that Kasich would be staying in the race after yesterday's Indiana primary (his fault, not mine), promising comedic politics for the next month or better.  

He's always been the last-place-guy, so it shouldn't come as a shock... certainly not news-worthy.   The only thing shocking is knowing that somehow, somewhere, somebody finally talked some sense into him.

Many assumed Reince, but word is he took the advice of Bob Roach, his close friend/wealth manager (sounds like a good friend to have) that "thought his message would be diminished” if he stayed in the race.   I assume he meant EVEN MORE diminished, but hey, friends tend to pull their punches.

That was yesteray, when he stated he would be staying in the race.   Then last night happened, leading Ted Cruz to call it quits (and blowing up Twitter in the process), but despite having even less delegates that a candidate suspending his campaign (again), Kasich vowed to venture on.

This morning Kasich (ever the pandering politician) took advantage of the May 4th holiday to spread his anti-Trump message:

(Yes, yes.... May the 4th be with you...  always)

8 HOURS LATER, he STILL appeared to be fundraising with an upcoming remarks release:

By this time I was intrigued.  Would my prophecy come true?   Might he actually tell the world that FINALLY the Republican race for the presidential nominee is down to a 2-MAN race, just as we Americans have been asking for months?!?  Oh man... how GREAT would that be!?! 

But alas, all he did was wimper and walk off stage, suspending his race in the process:

Per ABC News:

"He feels that it would just be tainted, it would lessen the message that he's trying to get out, if he became the laughing stock of the political pundits,” said Bob Roach, a wealth management adviser in Columbus who has known Kasich for decades and spoke with the governor before and after he decided to suspend his campaign.

... well, assuming he hadn't already "become".

So that's it.  Kasich called it quits, officially making him the 4th place finisher in what became a 2-man race between him and Trump.   God I love politics.

So bring on the Hillary attacks.  I have zero doubt that the Trumpateers will be even more ruthless than they were against Cruz.  Prepare yourself America:



Trump Wins; Takes All of Indiana's 57 Delegates; Ted Cruz Drops Out of Race for President


YUGE news!

<=  Official Cruz campaign response.

That puts his total delegate count (not counting unbound delegates) to 1010, just 227 delegates away from the magic number of 1237, and with Trump-leaning states like West Virginia (34 delegates), California (172 delegates) and New Jersey (51 delegates) on the horizon it didn't bode well for Cruz.

It leaves a "two-person" race with the Karate Chopping Waterboy Kasich, who for some reason is still staying in the race (he must think he can actually stop Trump on his own), which should make for a hilarious end to this Republican Primary.    I'm just waiting for Kasich to say, "FINALLY, a two-man race like everybody's been wanting for weeks!"   Seriously though... who wouldn't like a little icing on the cake in the form of a 90% to single digit win for Trump over KCWB?   :: raises hand ::

Say what you want about Cruz, he recognized the realities of race ahead, contrary to a couple of the candidates that remain.

Given Hillary's current lead and the fact that she'll split the delegate count with Sanders (regardless of who wins  she'll still score in the mid-40's) and be on cruise control until inevitably securing the nomination....  so it's looking more and more like this:








Cruz and Carly... Sittin' in a Tree...

S - I - N - G - I - N - G

So yeah, this happened, and yes, I think it's odd that he's choosing a VP choice, but not really when you consider the possible reason why:


172 California delegates.   That's why.

Now, WILL this be enough to actually stop Trump?  Possibly.  It really depends on how the rest of the delegates shake out, but consider this one additional strategy Cruz has implemented (on top of the Kasich-you-suck-go-spend-your-money-where-it-will-only-be-wasted strategy) to ensure the highest number of delegates going into Cleveland.   This appears to be more of an "every little bit helps" train of thought than it does game-changer.

Here's how California is looking right now:

RCP Average 3/24 - 4/21 -- -- 45.7 28.3 18.0 Trump +17.4
FOX News 4/18 - 4/21 583 LV 4.0 49 22 20 Trump +27
CBS News/YouGov 4/13 - 4/15 1012 LV 4.8 49 31 16 Trump +18
Field 3/24 - 4/4 558 LV 4.0 39 32 18 Trump +7

btw...  Fox News is the only poll sporting Cruz's numbers that low, but regardless Cruz is still in need of a significant swing to help in the national delegate count.   Is Carly popular enough to get him there?   I'll report, you decide.

Remember...  1237 is the magic number:

Whoopsie...  looks like somebody got cut off there at the end... 

...let's try that again:

...THERE we go.  Fixed to get the obnoxious eater on the page (Unbound delegates not included).

Five Thirty Eight has a good breakdown of the delegate count so far and what's ahead.   Key parts/dates worth mentioning:

DateState Delegates Won/Target Won/Target Won/Target Won/Target

MAY 3 Indiana 57
MAY 10 Nebraska 36
  West Virginia 34
MAY 17 Oregon 28
MAY 24 Washington 44
JUNE 7 California 172
  Montana 27
  New Jersey 51
  New Mexico 24
  South Dakota 29
  TOTAL 2,472

So we've got Cruz zeroing in on Indiana (57 delegates) where he trails Trump by about 6 pts, and he'll probably do well in Nebraska, Montana & South Dakota (92 combined delegates)... so yeah, it won't hurt him any getting somebody, something, any beneficial factor to work on that 172 number.

On the flip side Trump is certain to do well in the NE again with W Virginia and New Jersey (85 total delegates) so the likelihood of Cruz cutting down on his 409 point deficit much is rather slim.   That being said, Cruz still has an opportunity to inch closer to 750 delegates overall, which of course won't put him over Trump (who will likely have over 1100 delegates when it's all said and done, but it will help make a stronger case for him in Cleveland when he tries to persuade those remaining delegates (still a lot left over, not even counting the unbound delegates) to hop aboard the Cruz train.

Fun with delegate math:   check out this delegate calculator (courtesy of the NY Times)

Meanwhile the Trumpateers (i.e. Trump supporters, but I prefer that phrase... reminds of the Mousekateers and how they were children) will scream foul, because Trump says so, and because most of them (and much of the media for that matter) don't seem to understand how delegates work, their purpose, or even the process in which they are chosen.   Many also never got involved in grassroots Republican Party politics prior to the arrival of Donald Trump's campaign so they're at a disadvantage when it comes to the national convention... and they know it. 

Also, on a much, much sillier note....  if I were Ted Cruz I'd be calling John Bo(eh)ner and thanking him for his support.  There's simply no better endorsement of conservative  principals than to be childishly attacked by a washed-up, tearful RINO like Bo(eh)ner.




♂ Transphobia on Aisle 13 ♀

So today I had to make a tough decision.    I received a link to a pledge to boycott Target from a old friend after Target issued this press release in regards to "inclusivity", which read:

We believe that everyone—every team member, every guest, and every community—deserves to be protected from discrimination, and treated equally. Consistent with this belief, Target supports the federal Equality Act, which provides protections to LGBT individuals, and opposes action that enables discrimination.

Boy Dog... or Girl Dog? Doesn't Matter!In our stores, we demonstrate our commitment to an inclusive experience in many ways. Most relevant for the conversations currently underway, we welcome transgender team members and guests to use the restroom or fitting room facility that corresponds with their gender identity.

We regularly assess issues and consider many factors such as impact to our business, guests and team members. Given the specific questions these legislative proposals raised about how we manage our fitting rooms and restrooms, we felt it was important to state our position.

...and what a bold position it is.

Now the tough decision wasn't whether or not to reply back to him saying "stop sending me your stupid links" (like usual), nor whether or not to click the link (which I'm prone to do even if the previous reply holds true), but whether or not to take part in such a bold stance against venturing one of the greatest places known to man...  the women's restroom.

Clearly I have nothing against women's bathrooms.  For starters... they are SO much cleaner.   Seriously guys, flush after you've unleashed hell in a toilet.  On top of that the vast majority of the women's bathroos have diaper changing stations... PERFECT for us dads!   Try finding that in 95% of the men's rooms out there.   The icing on the cake:  tons of women stroll in and out of there on a regular basis.   It seems perfect for perverts like me, but please don't judge, I can't help the way that I am.

So, despite the obvious home runs, I considered AFA's proposal with an open mind nonetheless.   I weighed all the plusses & negatives of this burden sent via Gmail.   To keep an open mind I considered every possible drawback.

I mean, c'mon... we're talking about TARGET here.    I'm pretty sure my mother purchased 100% of my clothing there when I was growing up... usually off the clearance rack, making it extra embarrassing to go to school some days.   You can't put a clearance price on those kind of memories.

Fashion?  Are you kidding me?   If you had to put a gauge on fashion...  with 1 being Wal-Mart and a 10 being Michelle Obama's personal closet, Target is a solid 2... maybe even a 3.   It screams not-quite-the worst when talking about department store fashion.  I can relate to that.

Where else can I possibly go to buy Mossimo?   They were quite possibly THE COOLEST thing going back in my freshman year of high school.   Sure that was roughly 14 years ago, but you never know... early 90's clothing may make the kind of comeback only bellbottoms and fedoras could rival.

Let's not forget the activewear.   I literally have no idea where else they still sell Champion brand.   I didn't even know they were still around, but sure enough, they are alive and well and living just beyond the men's section (a sexist phrase if I've ever seen one) at Target.

Walk another couple aisles further and you'll see the latest and greatest in sporting goods.   Why spend the money on Adidas soccer balls when there's a perfectly good Franklin at a fraction of the price?    Take to the links with a thrifty new Nitro golf set.   What perfect day isn't complete without a ride around the neighborhood on a new Huffy bicycle?   Maybe pick up a Punisher skateboard for that emo kid that of yours that refuses to ride along with you.   He'll be the epidemy of cool when his friends see what a rebel he is on that.   Love, no coupons necessary.

With all these activities you'd be silly not to pick up some extra Hanes X-temp underwear and socks.   They're only available at Target... and everywhere that sells undergarments.

Man, I just made this decision REALLY hard on myself.   While I've been talking about all the good things Target has to offer, that petition has grown from 631,115 to 643,396 (and counting).   That's practically double what it was this morning.   

Maybe what Target really needs to do is turn this inclusivity into a marketing campaign.   Anybody can invite members of the opposite sex into their bathrooms and dressing rooms, but nowhere is there a cross-dresser section.   How about the clothing for those who want to look like a man, but prefer the shape and fit meant for a woman?   Bra sizes?  IMPOSSIBLE for me to judge.   Am I an A-cup?  B-cup?   I haven't completely let myself go, but how am I to know what to choose with all these gender-specific sizes?

Personally I would enjoy it a company just put everything in one section of their department store and said "here's where all the gay stuff is" so I wouldn't have to walk up and down every single aisle determining whether I would truly look gay in it or not.

If you're going to go all-inclusive... do it right Target.

Needless to say, I finally made my choice to sign the petition.   What the hay.   We don't even have any Targets down here anyway.   I now live in the hometown of Wal-Mart.   I'm already surrounded by stores that sell cheap crap I'll never want to buy (but will anyway because I'm frugal...  provided I can't find it on Amazon first)  ...and at least when I DO have to go there I don't have to worry about my daughters walking into a restroom and being met by a perve like me.



Never Forget

Monday marks the anniversary of the famed Doolittle Raid.

Nice summary here, with excerpts from "30 Seconds Over Tokyo."

Of course, this was back when the American president knew who the enemy was, and was not afraid to name him. 


Name This Thread

I know there is a new thread pending, but as it is still unpublished, and there has been a persistent howling for a new thread, this will do for now.  It needs a headline.  Send suggestions.

Page 1 ... 3 4 5 6 7 ... 242 Next 15 Entries »