| Choose Your Background -- |
Comment on November 12th, 2006.
i had decided to boycott that movie just from the commercials your opinion only reinforces that decision so ill spend the 8 bucks to on a jice it up and a bagel be cool nephew and easy on the red bull dude i dont want to see a news report about this crazy man climbing the nearest skyscraper
Comment on November 12th, 2006.
I thought it was funny… especially the naked hotel scene. Like South Park it is an equal opportunity offender taking no sides. It’s an over the top no bounderies film.
Let’s be honest here… he is a comedian who never let’s his victims get the upper hand in what he is attempting to do. He plays off their kindnesses, tolerence and ignorance for humor. For those of you who have NEVER pressed anyone’s buttons for the sake of fun or taunting, then good for you. You are better than I. He just does it for money. And he does it very well.
The only scene I didn’t laugh out loud at was the Frat Boy RV. They were so revolting as people, it was embarassing for them. He didn’t even have to play jokes on them they were such morons.
I admit, I would not be happy if this were done to me. I’m sure Pamela Anderson is not pleased either. However, I did enjoy watching it done to others.
Christianity does get the short end of the stick… absolutely. But come ON! I wasn’t raised in a Pentacostal church but the whole dancing and running around thing is odd to me. I’m only saying that as an outsider that it looks ridiculous to behave that way. Their behavior in the church scene didn’t look sacred or intimate, only a little on the wacky side.
Comment on November 12th, 2006.
Yeah, I thought it seemed like that was the direction this movie was headed. The idea that because he may attack everyone equally, it shouldn’t be offensive is, in my opinion, pretty crazy. Go back and research how the Nazi’s managed to turn an entire country against certain people…it started with satirical “humorous” cartoons. I defy anyone to claim that didn’t begin the shift of the public’s mindset.
As far as religious attacks in general…
Ah, yes, the other side of tolerance… It seems that every religion and belief is given uber-tolerance–except Christianity and Christian ethics. The pedulum has swung, my friend, and we are now on the defensive, in serious peril of having our religious rights stripped away.
What’s that quote? “First they came for the _____ and I did nothing because I was not a ____…. Then at last they came for me and there was no one left to fight.”
Comment on November 12th, 2006.
Boo-hoo. The Nazi’s specifically targeted groups that were unpopular (prostitutes, gypsys, Jews) at that time. Once they had popular opinion, they moved in for the kill on many other issues.
So what you are doing is comparing a popularly elected government by a people who felt like their identity and lives had striped away by the League of Nations after a World War to Borat, an English comedian? The Grand Canyon doesn’t even have that large of a span from north to south ledges.
Let’s focus on the religious aspect. If he had mocked one group but not another then there would be issue. But he not only mocked Jews, but Christians too. And let’s not forget he mocked Khazikstan culture (Islam) but simple portraying them as backward idiots with a village rapist.
The movie is in poor taste without a doubt, but mocks everyone… and does it well.
I believe that we must personally hold things sacred. If not, then nothing is. But it is NOT an industry’s responsibility to do so. Or a producer. Or a writers. It is YOUR personal responsibility to do it. It is YOUR job to influence your friends, co-workers and circle of influence. If you don’t, then who are you leaving it up to?
From what I see, we as Christian’s are not doing our job. Instead many of us stay in our rabbit holes with the rest of the rabbits. And when we come out of them, many times we are only out of them long enough to sprint to the next rabbit hole.
As I see it, we are reaping what we have sown; comfortable in what had, and now unwilling to give it up for what it should be.
So instead of ranting against a movie that is here today and gone tomorrow, stand daily for a larger goal and start letting people know that our culture is drowning in it’s own sin and it’s smiling as it’s head sinks below the water.
Comment on November 12th, 2006.
Number one, don’t come onto my site and be a condescending jerk to those around you. “Boo Hoo” is just antagonistic. If you have a point or disagrement say it, don’t be a A hole about it.
And no it’s not equal opportunity. The making fun of the Jews or Kazakstan wasn’t intrinsic. it was more parody. He would explicitly say “the jews are evil” or play out a FAKE anti semitic moment.
What he did with the pentecostals was show actual things, lingering here or there, taking the moment out of context so that it would seem silly and crazed.
He took an actual thing and edited to seem much more than what it was.
Everything else was him being the buffoon, or the anti semite.
If he had sat there and caught a jewish person doing something stupid and then played it as if Jews were all stupid then maybe we would all be in the same ball park.
And yeah Amy and you are right. Christians have been quiet and some of what’s going on is our fault. But that doesn’t mean that there isn’t a danger or Christian freedom being stripped away. I think making an analogy to Nazi Germany could be used. Look at the sate of Christian faith in this country from a hundred years ago, it doesn’t take much to see where the trend is going.
And I’m sure that there were people back in that day that thought “Ahh the Jews didn’t stand up so really it’s their own fault”
Comment on November 12th, 2006.
ummm excuse the horrible spelling errors, I don’t have my glasses on and wrote the above on the fly.
Comment on November 12th, 2006.
Give me a break… censor my “boo hoo” then if you don’t like my response.
It is complete idiocy for anyone to even argue the merits of this movie rationally when his entire focus is to be completely irrational. His view of Jews, ridiculous. Christians, ridiculous. Muslims, ridiculous. There is nothing serious you can take from this film at all and yet here you are whining about what he says about them.
What was so infuriating about Moore’s Bowling for Columbine or Farenheit 9/11 was his attempt to portray his cuts and soundbites as ultimate truth. He was attempting to sway you to believe him and his half truths. There is nothing in Borat like that at all. He’s just mocking it.
He played the Jews as evil b/c he himself is a Muslim. Except he played the Muslims as backward idiots. And to be honest, the running around and dancing in the Pentacostal church was silly to a layman even if it wasn’t done the entire time he was standing in the back holding hands with the guy who was speaking in tounges.
If you don’t like his humor, that’s fine. I get it. What I hear you saying though is that you don’t like the movie b/c he makes fun of religion; but what you really mean is that your sick of religion being made fun and Borat is your current bulls-eye.
Your being Dan Quale using the tv show Murphy Brown as an example for the state of moral values in America when she had a baby out of wedlock. The point wasn’t Murphy Brown, but the direction of America. The focus was in the wrong area. Didn’t work then, doesn’t work here. You can’t use “art” as a dart board since it 9 times out of 10 it imitates real life.
The Republicans finally got it right in 04 when their focus was moral values in the country and their deterioration. It was the focus, not the tv or movie watching habits of America. That is just the symptom of the greater disease. Get rid of the disease, there are no more symptoms. Getting rid of the disease is (your, mine, our) responsibility and that takes a lot of personal sacrifice that, personally, I don’t think American Christians want to make.
It’s stupid that we are mad at a movie that the public obviously thinks is funny when we can’t offer them something more.
Comment on November 12th, 2006.
Give me a break… censor my “boo hoo” then if you don’t like my response.
What crawled up your butt to make you so angry. If you can’t see that the way you are writing is just to incite people then you need to check yourself.
It is complete idiocy for anyone to even argue the merits of this movie rationally when his entire focus is to be completely irrational. His view of Jews, ridiculous. Christians, ridiculous. Muslims, ridiculous. There is nothing serious you can take from this film at all and yet here you are whining about what he says about them.
What the crap does this even mean? I’m not arguing any merits of this movie! I’m saying I didn’t like it - did you read my review? As a side note I tell people that it’s pretty offensive to my religious sensibilities and I (see it’s “I”) felt he was hammering on Christianity in a far different way, and I’m sick of Christians getting a bum rap. What I can’t put my opinions on my website now?
What was so infuriating about Moore’s Bowling for Columbine or Farenheit 9/11 was his attempt to portray his cuts and soundbites as ultimate truth. He was attempting to sway you to believe him and his half truths. There is nothing in Borat like that at all. He’s just mocking it.
I think you are wrong. In Borat number one, he makes no mention of him being muslim, number two Sascha Cohen is Jewish himself, so that does give him some sort of leeway in mocking his religion, but really he doesn’t even do that. We are watching him continually make fun of, Borat make fun of Jewish people. There is nothing that a Jewish person does that makes him look stupid. But the Christians…ohhhh, they are just stupid in themselves. That’s the message I got. If you want to argue about that not being the case be my guess, but I think you are dead wrong.
He played the Jews as evil b/c he himself is a Muslim. Except he played the Muslims as backward idiots. And to be honest, the running around and dancing in the Pentacostal church was silly to a layman even if it wasn’t done the entire time he was standing in the back holding hands with the guy who was speaking in tounges.
I’m sure it was. Because it was taken out of context within the confines of an entire church service. “silly” to a layman is just another way of you saying you think that brand of Christianity is stupid.
If you don’t like his humor, that’s fine. I get it. What I hear you saying though is that you don’t like the movie b/c he makes fun of religion;
Obviously you didn’t read my review. My review says nothing about that, except that I don’t like that brand of humor. My SIDENOTE says something about the propensity of people to make fun of Christianity in media, THAT’S what you have a problem with
but what you really mean is that your sick of religion being made fun and Borat is your current bulls-eye.
Your being Dan Quale using the tv show Murphy Brown as an example for the state of moral values in America when she had a baby out of wedlock. The point wasn’t Murphy Brown, but the direction of America. The focus was in the wrong area. Didn’t work then, doesn’t work here. You can’t use “art” as a dart board since it 9 times out of 10 it imitates real life.
You contradict yourself here, you may want to re-think this. If art imitates life, and life is declining in morality then why can’t you critique it as a mirror to declining morality?
The Republicans finally got it right in 04 when their focus was moral values in the country and their deterioration. It was the focus, not the tv or movie watching habits of America. That is just the symptom of the greater disease. Get rid of the disease, there are no more symptoms. Getting rid of the disease is (your, mine, our) responsibility and that takes a lot of personal sacrifice that, personally, I don’t think American Christians want to make.
It’s stupid that we are mad at a movie that the public obviously thinks is funny when we can’t offer them something more.
Ahh mr. Cynicism how I’ve missed you. I agree that what the public watches is none of our business. But I can sit there and say that I am not going to see something on the basis that I find it offensive to my religious sensibilities and encourage others to do the same. That’s capitalism. If more christians would stand up and take a voice maybe less crap would be written in various films/tv shows etc.
I’m not even sure what you are arguing except that you liked the movie and think it’s dumb that someone disagrees.
If you don’t think that religion is being treated unfairly in this world …okay…but why get on a comment board and start trying to slap people around with your ill conceived thoughts on morality and personal responsibility? (he said knowing that sentence was a slap back).
I just think you are being a butt. Did you have your V8 today?
Comment on November 12th, 2006.
I wrote this:
“Like South Park it is an equal opportunity offender taking no sides. It’s an over the top no bounderies film.”
She wrote this:
“The idea that because he may attack everyone equally, it shouldn’t be offensive is, in my opinion, pretty crazy. Go back and research how the Nazi’s managed to turn an entire country against certain people…it started with satirical “humorous” cartoons. I defy anyone to claim that didn’t begin the shift of the public’s mindset.”
It was after that I laid out my boo-hoo comment. So before you go off hammering me about my opinion bashing, call on your other writers about slamming opinions. Mine just happened to be more direct.
You did a good job in seperating the Review and the Christian Opinion. She mixed it together stating that satire was the beginning to an erosion of acceptance and I’m pretty sure she wasn’t talking about the Feminists or Politicians.
So my response was to say that satire of religion wasn’t the problem; that complaining about religious satire doesn’t do anything but make us look like we’re crying b/c we got made fun of. Instead we should offer something greater than Borat, not just say, “Hey, don’t do that to Christians.”
As for the equal opportunity mocking, it is my opinion he was all over the place. If you don’t agree, that’s fine. My response was more to her response, not yours. However, you then jumped in and called me an A-Hole.
For the rest of your comments, it is a misunderstanding. It is her comments that I am responding to not yours. She insinuated that she didn’t like the film due to it’s content, not b/c it didn’t fit her humor. And as you stated, and I agree with, that is fine. I just don’t think its enough to say you don’t like the movie b/c it makes fun of Christians and expect words and complaining to solve the problem (which she may or may not believe).
All I see from people is complaining without a personal positive action taking place afterwards. Hence my comment: “As I see it, we are reaping what we have sown; comfortable in what had, and now unwilling to give it up for what it should be.”
I hope that calms your hyper-sensitive emotions you little girl.
Oh… the Murphy Brown thing… it doesn’t work b/c he brought attention to a morality issue by using a fictional character on a tv show. It’s like speaking of about the evils of adultery but using Desperate Housewives as an example. It’s silly b/c they’re not real. The characters are just a product of what we are willing to watch. We can’t tell people not to watch them b/c they’re bad and not tell them what is “bad” and “good”… well, we CAN, but if they’re entertaining no one really cares which means there is a much larger problem. I just think it’s not a good way to go.
Comment on November 12th, 2006.
It didn’t sound to me at all she was “Slamming” your opinion. She sounded reasonable.
The Boo Hoo didn’t.
As for calling you an Ahole I apologize, but I get to do that because you are pretty much my best friends and if I don’t get to call you an Ahole then well, what do I get?
I think talking about, or whining, as you like to refer to it, something that we perceive as an injustice is good. Actions of course are better, but how do actions take place without words….
“I’m sorry Mr. King if you have a dream, but it really sounds like whining to me” heh.
Hollywood I believe is both money driven and yes, to a degree, agenda driven. But telling people to not support a movie because it makes an immoral statement isn’t bad. People can take the opinion and do whatever they want. But if they decide to spend money on it, it will in fact, reinforce a type of ideology and you’ll see many more films of that type.
After Borat I’m sure you’ll probably see a deluge of films in the same vein that try and cross even more lines. Where does it stop?And when is it okay to whine about it?
As for you percieving me as being a girl, is that the reason you are always hitting on me?
Encouraging others to think on “good” things, I would think, would be a good thing in itself.
“All I see from people is complaining without a personal positive action taking place afterwards”
Well what’s the positive action we are supposed to do?
And the Murphy Brown thing, Quayle said this. “”[i]t doesn’t help matters when primetime TV has Murphy Brown—a character who supposedly epitomizes today’s intelligent, highly paid, professional woman—mocking the importance of fathers, by bearing a child alone, and calling it just another ‘lifestyle choice.’”
He was lambasted for that. You may think it was stupid of him to address a fictional character in a speech about moral decline, but as you agreed, media is a reflection of society so why not? If the point is that you are talking about “causes” of moral decline and one of your arguments is that media is a contributing factor, it’s perfectly reasonable.
Garbage in Garbage out.
I love ya bud, and like O’reilly I’ll give you the last word….maybe 
Comment on November 13th, 2006.
She called my opinion “pretty crazy.”
As for the Ahole, I just wanted to complain about it to press your buttons.
The Murphy Brown thing is fine for people to do. It just backfired terribly on Quayle b/c she was tv character not a real person. It is reasonable to do, but not very successful.
It is fine to complain but we just can’t leave it at that. It is fine to not spend the money on the stuff, but just don’t leave it at that. I wasn’t saying that was what you were doing… just that our words absolutely need to be followed up by telling the public that Borat is a movie, but there is God that is so much more than a 1 hour 30 minute film.
I was talking to JJ about you being riled up and it seems that you don’t mind when my comments are focused towards a side you don’t agree with but don’t care for them when they are directed towards something you do. I wasn’t angry with you, just wondering if I am on the right page about that.
Comment on November 13th, 2006.
“it seems that you don’t mind when my comments are focused towards a side you don’t agree with but don’t care for them when they are directed towards something you do”
huh?
Comment on November 13th, 2006.
We walked out when the naken men fight scene started. I can handle politically incorrect, but the whole thing was just plain offensive. Didn’t even get to the Pentecostal part. Who knew it could get worse after that scene.
Comment on November 13th, 2006.
Wow! Did I start this? I guess I’ll have to check back here for people’s responses to my comments, huh?
1). Jeremy, I apologize for inciting riots on your page, and I thank you for attempting to deflect antagonism from your newest (and probably most troublesome to date) member.
2). Hello, Jaybo. Nice to meet you. I’m Amy. My statement was that in my opinion, the idea you brought up was “pretty crazy,” and I’m sorry if it came across as insulting you. I was attempting to disagree with the idea you brought up, not attack you personally. And for the record, any time you feel in need of a good cry, as far as I’m concerned, you go right ahead.
Now that that’s out of the way, let’s see if I can wade through the comments to properly respond:
“The Nazi’s specifically targeted groups that were unpopular (prostitutes, gypsys, Jews, {yes, homosexuals and many other groups}) at that time. Once they had popular opinion, they moved in for the kill on many other issues.”
That’s just my point. They may have been unpopular, but no one was ready to go commit mass murder, just because of popularity. If the Nazi’s had approached the population with their real agenda, they would have been rejected as barbaric. My point is that learning to laugh at something is the beginning of learning to accept it. It creates psychological calluses. Only after their ideas were accepted by could they “move in for the kill” as you say. I’m not comparing Borat to the Nazi’s, as you suggest, but I do believe that his form of comedy follows the same thread as what the Nazi’s used to begin their campaign of prejudice. The number of calluses the psyche develops does not negate their existence.
“I believe that we must personally hold things sacred. If not, then nothing is. But it is NOT an industry’s responsibility to do so. Or a producer. Or a writers. It is YOUR personal responsibility to do it. It is YOUR job to influence your friends, co-workers and circle of influence. If you don’t, then who are you leaving it up to?”
I could not agree more! Hollywood is not Christian, and it’s not their top priority to bring glory to God. It’s their priority to make money (and in further their own personal views). The movie viewers control how much money is made for each movie. If one genre does not make a good profit, Hollywood will eventually stop producing it. If it does, then they will produce even more of that style. So, while we can’t expect the industry to hold our beliefs sacred, we can influence whether they are mocked or revered.
“You did a good job in seperating the Review and the Christian Opinion. She mixed it together stating that satire was the beginning to an erosion of acceptance and I’m pretty sure she wasn’t talking about the Feminists or Politicians. So my response was to say that satire of religion wasn’t the problem; that complaining about religious satire doesn’t do anything but make us look like we’re crying b/c we got made fun of. Instead we should offer something greater than Borat, not just say, “Hey, don’t do that to Christians.”… It is her comments that I am responding to not yours. She insinuated that she didn’t like the film due to it’s content, not b/c it didn’t fit her humor. It’s stupid that we are mad at a movie that the public obviously thinks is funny when we can’t offer them something more.”
Actually, I didn’t mix anything, because I wasn’t giving a review. I never saw the movie. My first sentence “Yeah, I thought it seemed like that was the direction this movie was headed” was (though it did, in fact, give an indication that I didn’t think that I would like the movie) the only comment I made on the movie. The rest was a response to the blog or other (Jaybo’s) comments. I do not approve of this kind of “comedy,” but not because it simply fails to fit my own personal sense of humor. I think that this form of comedy is the beginning of acceptance, (not the erosion of) as I mentioned earlier, and I believe that history would back me up on that. I find this a disturbing trend for any group…any religion or ethnicity, and I was under the impression that the point of allowing comments to be made on blogs is to have an open floor of discussion about ideas and opinions. Those are mine. I don’t feel mad at this movie, but I certainly don’t feel obligated to laugh just because some of the public thinks it’s funny, or not to feel concern about the significance of the motivation for the laughter.
“So instead of ranting against a movie that is here today and gone tomorrow, stand daily for a larger goal and start letting people know that our culture is drowning in it’s own sin and it’s smiling as it’s head sinks below the water…. I just don’t think its enough to say you don’t like the movie b/c it makes fun of Christians and expect words and complaining to solve the problem (which she may or may not believe).”
I did go on to express further opinions on state of “tolerance” in the US with regard to Christianity in general (at this point, breaking entirely from the topic of the movie). My statement:
”As far as religious attacks in general…
Ah, yes, the other side of tolerance… It seems that every religion and belief is given uber-tolerance–except Christianity and Christian ethics. The pendulum has swung, my friend, and we are now on the defensive, in serious peril of having our religious rights stripped away.”
It seems that you understood this to be a continuing discussion of the movie in question. It was not, and I am sorry that I may not have made that clear enough. I do believe it is our civic duty to fight to maintain our constitutional rights… (Again, this has nothing to do with any movie nor is it an evangelist attempt) when they are under fire. The trend is headed that way, and it would be foolish to assume that it will stop on its own. As Alexis de Tocqueville said, “The only thing necessary for the triumph of evil is that good men do nothing.” BTW, that’s not whining or complaining. That’s an encouragement to take “a personal positive action.”
“It is fine to complain but we just can’t leave it at that. It is fine to not spend the money on the stuff, but just don’t leave it at that. I wasn’t saying that was what you were doing… just that our words absolutely need to be followed up by telling the public that Borat is a movie, but there is God that is so much more than a 1 hour 30 minute film.”
Except that it might be hard for people to find your case convincing if they sat next to you while you were laughing your head off at a movie that “is in poor taste without a doubt.”
Just a little food for thought after a friendly discussion of differing views. In complete honesty, Jaybo, I intend no disrespect towards you in any way and I’m not in the least bit offended with you for disagreeing with me. I’m sure you’re a terrific guy and I respect you stating your opinions.
Comment on November 13th, 2006.
Wow! That’s a really long post… Sorry…
Comment on November 13th, 2006.
Love it
Comment on November 13th, 2006.
Wow… that was really long. It seems we agree on most things which is good b/c my eyes couldn’t scan the tiny letters much longer.
I laughed at the movie though. In fact, I REALLY laughed at the naked men wrestling in the hotel room.
It just seems my focus wasn’t drawn to mocking religious people but ridiculous behavior. Jeremy doesn’t like that type of humor and that’s fine. It’s definately not for everyone.
I didn’t mind them making fun of religion in the movie b/c 1) it’s a ridiculous movie and 2) ridiculous people got made fun of and 3) a ridiculous character did ridiculous things that I would never take seriously. I also laugh at Christians who don’t hand out candy on Halloween. I think those people should be taunted as well.
If you are interested in other irritating arguments, you can look them up on the site. I’ve been infuriating people for quite some time on Spacekicker.
Nice of you to join.
Comment on November 13th, 2006.
You… you should be quiet. You have a three day timeout for calling me an A-hole.
As I said before, you don’t seem to mind my comments when I’m making them against an opinion you don’t agree with, but if the coin is flipped I get told to “check myself?”
If I knew anything about computers or hacking, I’d consider posting Hillary for President banners all over the front of home page.
And tell that woman (who’s brain has most OBVIOUSLY been scientifically proven to be the size of a squirrel’s) that I’m not a newbie around here. Liberals and morons have been fearing my keystrokes for years on this site. Where’s my props, yo?
Comment on November 13th, 2006.
Really? I must be disturbed. I thought that was the funniest scene in the whole movie! Especially when he chased him down the hallway in the elevator with the people in it.
Comment on November 13th, 2006.
Actually that second paragraph isn’t true. I went back and looked at other times you didn’t agree with me and you didn’t respond that way.
I was out of line on my rantings. sorry.
Comment on November 13th, 2006.
Isn’t that the truth! I was having an equally hard time reading what I was writing… Definately would recommend bigger font next time I write for an hour…or so.
I understand what you’re saying… definately different perspectives. Oh Crap! Now you’re going to taunt me for not passing out candy this year! *sigh* I wore a costume and went to a Halloween party–I posted pictures to prove it–does that exclude me from the taunted group?
Thanks for the invite to your site. I’ll look you up sometime. It’s always interesting to meet another cyber-stranger/friend.
Comment on November 13th, 2006.
Just so you know that Article is fake I believe. The city does not exist. Erech explored it on his site.
Comment on November 13th, 2006.
Said “woman” would be…?
Comment on November 14th, 2006.
Womankind in general, but in this case you are in the vacinity of “said woman.”
Comment on November 14th, 2006.
No no… the tauning only applies to those who don’t celebrate Halloween on principle. The absence of candy is usually a tell-tale sign of stupidity. However, you happily celebrated by dressing up and attending a party with like-minded people.
Comment on November 14th, 2006.
yup still an ahole
Comment on November 14th, 2006.
If thats what it takes to feel better about yourself goood job!
Comment on November 14th, 2006.
Yeah erech really doesn’t know much. I’m pretty sure it’s real.
Comment on November 14th, 2006.
Jaybo! Buddy! You are just tailor-made for politics! A born natural! I was so impressed with the deftness with which you were able to sidestep the issues of a rational debate (”the font was too small to read”???) and just jump right into baseless personal insults. Seriously, you’d fit in perfectly in Washington.
Come, come now, Jaybo… let’s be reasonable. I may be the new kid on the block, but if this oh-so-lengthy-blog is any indication of your style of debate, I seriously doubt that anyone feels intimidated by your keystrokes. Irritated, perhaps, but certainly not intimidated. I think you may be suffering from delusions of your perceived reputation.
Oh props! Most definately! Saying “that woman (who’s brain has most OBVIOUSLY been scientifically proven to be the size of a squirrel’s)” is a really powerful point to make! It really carries serious weight–IN KINDERGARTEN!!!!! (That’s interesting, when I signed up on this site, I had to check that I was over 18–I thought everyone else did too. Hmmm…)
I could tell that you were looking for a way out of the discussion, and was more than willing to give it; however, if you ever decide to participate in a mature, civil debate on this site, I’d recommend that you copy and paste the comments you are responding to into a word document and enlarge the font so that you can read and respond to real issues. It will do wonders for the actual power your keystrokes carry.
Wishing you the very best of days!
Amy (a.k.a. that woman, i.e. “she”)
Comment on November 14th, 2006.
owned
Comment on November 15th, 2006.
Owned? She didn’t watch Borat and you seem to have ignored the line when he was speaking with the Feminists so before both of you start burning your bra’s in protest it was a line from the movie. It was a joke. Jeremy will be happy to tell you about it, except it seems to have flown over his head.
Comment on November 15th, 2006.
tells you how funny it was, and no I wasn’t just saying owned because of ONE line.
it’s that you were owned silly man, with your silly arguments
Hugs and skittles
Comments can contain some xhtml. Names and emails are required (emails aren't displayed), url's are optional.