Skip navigation




    • Steve T
    • Posted November 4, 2009 at 11:24 am
    • Permalink

    Does she need one of her crystals-?

    …perhaps she finished smoking all of Diversity’s jump rope-?

  1. I’m thinking they better skip the crystals and go straight to good ole Western medicine, Steve T.

    • GeekNerd
    • Posted November 4, 2009 at 11:42 am
    • Permalink

    Maybe she can get a prescription for medical marijuana?

    • Melek
    • Posted November 4, 2009 at 11:59 am
    • Permalink

    Love the title Zack! LOL 🙂

    Real science dealing with the effects of phony science … 😉

    I wish you well 🙂 Melek

    “Climate change (provides) the greatest chance to bring about justice and equality in the world. No matter if the science is all phony, there are still collateral benefits (to global warming policies).” – Christine Stewart

  2. Oh she’s already got two of those, GeekNerd. Got the second one because she forgot she had the first one.

  3. Thanks Melek, and good quote too– though I will persist in calling it Global Warming, not the newly faddish replacement, Climate Change. They coined Global Warming and as far as I’m concerned they’re gonna live with it– even as record colds and an overall cooling trend are now being recognized.

    • Ken
    • Posted November 4, 2009 at 12:15 pm
    • Permalink

    If ignorance is truly bliss, Conservatives must be the happiest people in the world.

  4. Ken: Statistically, conservatives ARE happier than liberals, also longer lived; though I ascribe wholesome-mindedness and (in many cases) Faith, among other things; certainly not ignorance. But I do think the inverse is true: that liberal/leftists are often the most miserable and cranky of people.

  5. Zack – You should dedicate this installment to the good folks at Newsweek:

  6. I will, EricTheRed. Think it will get me a spot as a regular contributor??

    • MethodistMin
    • Posted November 4, 2009 at 2:40 pm
    • Permalink

    When she feels better Sierra might be a little disencahnted with Obama. After all, he did claim that the seas would stop their rise after he was elected to office. ;^)

    That was one of my favorite messianic images from the mouth of the faux messiah.

  7. “That was one of my favorite messianic images from the mouth of the faux messiah.”

    Oh totally, Methodistmin; it crystallized all of the credulous, gullible superstitiousness that marks so many of the non- or semi-religious left: believing in anything in lieu of genuine traditional Faith.

    • Mark
    • Posted November 4, 2009 at 3:43 pm
    • Permalink

    Well if Sierra is on ObamaCare she’s got nothing to worry about, although for the “planet to heal” that particular treatment might have to be rationed in the future…

    • Hysterical Woman
    • Posted November 4, 2009 at 4:50 pm
    • Permalink

    Why isn’t Diversity concerned for Sierra?

  8. Mark: Sierra has her own planet-healing project going in the field behind the house, where she grows vegetables and pot plants. Nothing greener than marijuana…

    Hysterical: She’s concerned; just doesn’t wear it on her plaid sleeve. On the other hand, you have to remember that she’s seen all this before and its getting really old.

    • Sarah
    • Posted November 4, 2009 at 5:20 pm
    • Permalink

    Real American Conservatives, unlike the filthy, pot-smoking hippie liberals as we see in this comic, never overreact to a minor incident.

  9. Aw c’mon, didn’t it at least make you crack a hint of a smile, Sierra? –er, I mean Sarah.

    • Big Money
    • Posted November 4, 2009 at 5:36 pm
    • Permalink

    Don’t be silly, Sarah, you can hardly turn on the news without seeing reports of stoned environmentalists having heart attacks.

  10. Big Money: Remind me never to invest any of MY money in your sense of humor. [These are cartoons. Remember satire?] Besides, what environmentalists stoned and unstoned ARE doing is a thousand times worse than just having a heart attack on their own property: they’re propagating a worldwide politico-environmento-economic movement based on a massive fraud.

  11. Poor Diversity.

    I think in the storyline she’s having some turmoil in her life. Or will, regarding all this.

    I have to say the very name DIVERISTY for a girl is HILARIOUS, Zack.

    The very fact that what SHOULD be a surrealistic thought stream about such things in life, makes us chuckle, is due in part to how much for the weird, the political landscape has changed.

  12. Zack, now you’ve done it.

    From now on I won’t be enjoying even an occasional Sierra Mist soda without wondering if poor Diversity is standing in the street talking to the paramedics…

    Wheatgrass milk, anyone?


  13. Wakefield: [Do they call you Wake for short, and if so does that creep you out with its funereal overtones?] Anyway, thanks for the cool input these days, its been a blast reading your thoughts. Glad you like “Diversity”; there was real controversy among my friends when I told them I was gonna do this project because my original name for it was going to be “Heather Has Too Many Mommies.” We decided though that it was too gay-centered that way; I needed a broader canvas on which to skewer liberalism. Hence “Diversity Lane” was born, and don’t anyone try to tell me there aren’t libs out there entirely capable of bestowing this ludicrous name upon one of their children…

    • wootabega
    • Posted November 4, 2009 at 6:21 pm
    • Permalink

    “they’re propagating a worldwide politico-environmento-economic movement based on a massive fraud.”

    Yeah! I mean, if the planet is WARMING, then why is it getting COLD outside? Checkmate, liberals.

    • Ken
    • Posted November 4, 2009 at 6:30 pm
    • Permalink

    “Yeah! I mean, if the planet is WARMING, then why is it getting COLD outside? Checkmate, liberals.”

    “If ignorance is truly bliss, Conservatives must be the happiest people in the world.”

    “Statistically, conservatives ARE happier than liberals”

    Those fit together nicely.

  14. Hi Zack.

    Wake is good for short, and those who know me tend to use that and always have. I freely admit that it’s an Old English name–and too much Oldness in the English for some people, and a mouthful. (I got it from my maternal grandfather.)

    Long ago there was a Lord Wakefield, and then that famous story entitled “The Vicar of Wakefield”

    That about covers it in common culture.

    It’s mostly a place-name these days, like Wakefield UK, or Massachusetts, so causes all manner of confusion to some folks.

    So unless it’s an IRISH “Wake” where everyone is gettin’ sloshed, just “Wake” is fine.

    In fact, it might be fine for that use too…

    As far as other names and the cutey-pie nomenclature system of hippydom, I find that Diversity is NOT that much out of line. Mark Steyn had a column a while back mentioning the continuing confusion of family dynamics with some “alternative” couples naming their…well…..”offspring” things that sound like something you might take the ski gear to, or sprinkle on foods: Aspen and Saffron

    But the whole concept of this lib family’s continuing war with reality is a hoot just for the comedic setting!

    I had a neighbor (no, I think the mom named the kid Ashley) who DID give to me a “peace and life” plant (root cutting from a pothos plant..) as a reminder to meditate on world peace. She got the idea from one of her goddess encouter/study groups at the local church.

    I kid you not.

    I still have it near the master bath.

    • Big Money
    • Posted November 4, 2009 at 6:57 pm
    • Permalink

    How can Al Gore talk about carbon credits, when he himself is MADE OF CARBON. slam dunk.

    • Tyrone
    • Posted November 4, 2009 at 7:39 pm
    • Permalink

    diversity all looking like she stone-cold don’t care that a family member might be dying

    invisible hand of the market of life at work?

    • Tyrone
    • Posted November 4, 2009 at 7:40 pm
    • Permalink

    z, i don’t think seeing someone from ur family dying in front of you ever “gets old” btw. that some soulless shit yo.

  15. Yo, yo, Tyrone, this be a car-TOON stonecold girl, dig. Yo, dey gots emo-shuns & attitudes that don’ nec’sarily jive wit’ real-life, yo. It like, when roadrunner cause dat coyote to go over the cliff an’ you laff even tho it be cold, bro.

  16. What is the title of that book? I can’t make it out. Great cartoon too. I laughed out loud when I read it.

  17. Vegas: She’s reading– WAS reading– “Global Warming & You.” Thanks, I’ll see if it’s available in bulk for you to teach to your class.

    • Tyrone
    • Posted November 4, 2009 at 9:49 pm
    • Permalink

    Z, what with all the jive talk and shit? you accuse me of being a fake cause I cant write good, so I try and type better and all you bringing is some blackface shit from the 1930s? Damn g, you aint seen a brother in 40 years? Least your commenters respond to me like a human being. I dont agree with them, but at least they got some manners. I thought you conservatives were all about family values and good manners and shit.

    • Ken
    • Posted November 4, 2009 at 9:49 pm
    • Permalink

    “attitudes that don’ nec’sarily jive wit’ real-life, yo”

    Conservatives are disconnected from reality. I agree with you, Zack.

    • Manuel Calavera
    • Posted November 4, 2009 at 10:30 pm
    • Permalink

    I…just..don’t even get the comic really. A swing and a miss Zack, can’t win em all.

    • Tyrone
    • Posted November 4, 2009 at 10:51 pm
    • Permalink

    see manny, its funny cause a hippy stoner global warming believer paniced and hurt herself so bad they had to call 911 and paramedics have to revive her with tanks and a needle.

    • Steve T
    • Posted November 5, 2009 at 12:05 am
    • Permalink

    Manuel & Tyrone,

    Alright – I understand that you do not appreciate the subtle (and hilarious) humor in this cartoon from Zack.

    For a moment, please set aside whatever you begrudge me for my caustic & adversarial writing techniques (however I have offended you), and please consider the serious context behind Zack’s depiction.

    As shown, Sierra has had a minor heart attack, due to her shock and horror that she believed the water (from an overflowing bathtub) was from rising oceans.

    The global warming agenda Al Gore has, is the most shamelessly fraudulent pack of specious lies that has been injected and contaminated the American political arena ever. His assertions are so terribly & maliciously false, I submit you will become very, very angry at him, and those who promote his self-serving pulp-fiction, once you learn the objective facts, in their entire context.

    The assertion that human-industrial-living activities is causing global warming, is brazen bovine scatology (aka – bullshit) – BIG ASS LIE-!!!

    The center of the ‘Glo-BULL Warming’ hoax centers around the alleged destructive effects of one of the three most commonly found gasses found in our atmosphere: Carbon Dioxide (CO2)

    You, I, Zack,… everyone reading this, exhales CO2.
    All animals exhale CO2, including your dog, or cat, or pet yack,… whatever.
    All natural processes of decomposition (leaves, vegetation in the woods, road kill sweltering and rotting in the sun) give off CO2.
    Planetary-scale biological processes, from oceans, from forest lands,… – belch out billions of tons of CO2, every day without fail.

    Fact 1: – water vapor, also in the form of humid air – has fifteen (15x) times the radiant heat retaining capabilities as does free carbon dioxide. You can confirm this in the table of physical properties of substances.
    Why doesn’t Al Gore advocate installing air conditioners around ALL the tropical regions of the earth-?

    Fact 2: – any ONE of several major volcanic eruptions in the past 40-50,…500+ years, have ejected into the atmosphere millions of times the “global warming gasses & matter” than has been produced by ALL of human activity, in ALL known history.
    Somehow – natural processes cleaned that up, darn quickly.

    Fact 3: – All human activity accounts for less than 4% of -ALL- CO2 cycled into the atmosphere, every day.

    Al Gore has huge financial interests in people buying “carbon offsets” – he has become a near billionaire from it.

    Everything I have stated can be affirmed from basic physical science sources.

    Now – here is Zacks character Sierra, who has swallowed the BS science-fiction from Al Gore’s agenda.
    She is a pot-head,… a chemical habit well-known for helping folks become less than rational, deprives them of the ability of critical thinking, and basically coaxes folks into becoming mentally lazy, and confident, and even arrogant in their ignorance.

    So – this moo-moo wearing (big fat-assed) pot-head, ex-Woodstock hippie hemp-head, has swallowed hook-line-and sinker (that is a fishing expression – from those of us who went fishing as kids) the false bullsh-t from Al Gore, and has freaked out, believing the water on her floor, is from ocean over-flow.

    When the total mass & volume of the frozen Antarctic ice caps is calculated, the amount of water there is a tiny-teeny fraction of the millions of cubic-miles of water it would require, to have the oceans rise, as the lying punk Al Gore wants us to believe.
    The planet earth has nowhere near the water present – to have what Gore asserts, come true.

    He is a shameless fraud – and Sierra has had a heart attack, because she has accepted it. Simple.

    Facts are [damn] stubborn things…

    • Steve T
    • Posted November 5, 2009 at 12:18 am
    • Permalink

    Chis E-
    Based on this last effluvia of yours, the preponderance of the evidence is that you are a mentally-ill moron.

    Did something traumatic happen to you, at about seven-years of age, like being forcefully pulled, screaming from your mothers nipple-?

    Or – did you begin smoking large amounts of high-THC pot from age 10-?

    What you write does not even dignify a reply – other than suggesting you find some form of mental health assistance.

    Have a nice day-!

    • Sarah
    • Posted November 5, 2009 at 12:31 am
    • Permalink

    Manny, it’s funny because liberals are stupid and conservatives are smart. I know that’s a little too subtle for your puny, liberal mind to understand, but bear with me here.

    • Steve T
    • Posted November 5, 2009 at 12:43 am
    • Permalink

    Tomorrow, I will spend at least an hour, in the local gift shop, in the ‘sympathy card’ section, to find a card for you that expresses my heart-felt sorrow for your liberal mental-misgivings-!

    How about you discover something new in your life,…such as an adult-oriented attitude, and an ability to engage in a contest of idea’s or disagreements, in a sober & mature manner-?

    Sorry – do I seem “insensitive”-?

    • Tyrone
    • Posted November 5, 2009 at 12:58 am
    • Permalink

    steve, why does global warming being wrong make it funny that someone is in a bad medical condition and needs paramedics? and why does that make it alright that diversity dont care a member of her family might be dying just cause they dont agree politically?

    and z, i see you still hiding from being called out. you gonna come correct son? or you just gonna keep wipin on that kiwi shoe polish and singin mammy every time a brother post?

    • Steve T
    • Posted November 5, 2009 at 1:17 am
    • Permalink

    I will never presume to speak for Zack.

    I perceive the humor is from a FICTIONAL cartoon – of an irrational, ‘stoner’ woman, who has accepted foolish beliefs,… very brain-dead, she embraces a very ignorant-based and mislead belief system.

    Perhaps, you have not read into the character descriptions of Sierra, or read the history samples that show her character over many cartoons (within Zacks website).

    I suggest you search into those area’s – so to better understand the context of what I have been trying to explain.

    • Tyrone
    • Posted November 5, 2009 at 2:01 am
    • Permalink

    steve just answer the question. why is it ok to be all smug and enjoying it when a family member might be dying just because she dont agree with her politics?

    • Steve T
    • Posted November 5, 2009 at 3:03 am
    • Permalink

    You are asking me a question that should be directed to Zack.

    Having said that – my enjoyment and laughter comes from the goofy situation that she (Sierra) has stupidly invested her beliefs in the false teachings of a blithering buffoon – AL Gore.

    Sierra is NOT (I strongly suspect) going anywhere – I expect Zack has many, many future uses for her,… yes, Zack-?

    Tyrone — does that answer your question-??

  18. Steve T– Thanks for the yeoman’s effort to inform Tyrone per the intricacies of my humor. I’ve gained fresh inspiration from this through-the-night dialog and am considering working up a college course on Purpose vs Deconstruction in Diversity Lane Humor. As with many college courses, the only requirement for enrollment is that you start out with zero sense of humor.

    Tyrone: The heart attack in this context is humorous in the same way it is humorous when Elmer Fudd falls off a cliff during Wabbit Season, or Curly gets wacked with a frying pan by Moe several times during a Three Stooges episode. In all seriousness, you need to think through those and countless thousands of other examples of “misfortune humor” throughout history, get a handle on why you or at least many others find them to be amusing, and then apply that same context to my stuff. Beyond that, I unfortunately don’t have the time to further analyze this question– have full time work all day, need to sleep at night, etc.

  19. Sarah,

    People will always argue in the end about what’s funny. Those on the receieving end of things generally find less humor in their own foibles.

    I think what Zack has going on here, though, is the foibles of life as presented by those who take on a superior air, and feel themselves to be on the good side of progress, history, tolerance, diveristy (yipes) and all other pieties that sound nice but are largely un-examined.

    That’s what makes it so funny.

    There are sites out there, most of them crass but a handful clever, that purport to be doing the same thing with or to conservatives.

    But unless it is something vulgar or truly off the mark, conservatives have the ability to be self-deprecating. PJ O’Rourke is able to skewer anyone, for example, though of course his format is text presentation in numerous books.

    But the point is the same.

    People might claim, as some do with Zack, that caricature or cartoon is not accurate portryal.

    Yes and then no. Like commercials, toons can over-emphasize a point and most things in life are presented in more subtle a fashion. However, everything knows you have to caricature the drawing or an aspect to make sure the point is seen by the largest audience possible.

    Having said that, it’s not THAT much of a stretch with liberals who name their kids Saffron, give Peace Plants to neighbors, attend Wicca and goddess encounter sessions at the local YMCA, and force the kids to all vegetarianism and even force this on dogs and cats in some cases.

    As to politics of late?

    Oh boy….

  20. Thanks Wake, that was a fine analysis. Steve T., me and you will be forming the nucleus of my developing College of Humor.

    If I ever tried to force my cat to become a vegetarian he would claw me to death. And he would be right.

  21. The literature for my new college can say, “Rawsthorne Academy: Where liberals come to learn to laugh again– starting from Square One.”

    Whaddya think??

    • Wake
    • Posted November 5, 2009 at 8:44 am
    • Permalink

    Sounds like a winner, Zack.

    • gunner
    • Posted November 5, 2009 at 11:38 am
    • Permalink

    just happened by via a link, and subscribed by e-mail on the spot. i expect this will join chris muir’s “day by day” as one of my favourite political cartoon sites. i enjoy humour that pokes hard at “progressive” stuffed shirts and barbecues liberal sacred cows.

  22. “Barbeques liberal sacred cows”– I like it, gunner. Maybe you should also have said “…irons progressive stuffed shirts”…

    (Thanks for subscribing.)

    • thesecolorsdontrun
    • Posted November 5, 2009 at 1:22 pm
    • Permalink

    All political disagreements aside, appending “ironing stuffed shirts” to Gunner’s statement would simply belabor the jokes too much.

    brevity, soul of wit and all that.

    Moreover, If you honestly wanted to lampoon global warming. I suggest you start calling it Gorebal Warming. As he’s typically the only person getting hot n’ bothered.

    I mean honestly? It’s a vauge threat with skeptics (some of whom are NOT actually bankrolled by the oil companies.) stating that we do not have all the answers, but that’s okay because we’ll just take unilateral action despite the fact that the intelligence is in dispute on the nature of the actions with plans that may hinder the everyday lives of american citizens and won’t go away until we can through enough people and money at the problem.

    Where have I heard this before? Oh right, Mr. Bush’s war on freedo- I mean Terror.

    If this is a legitimate climatological phenomenon. And who knows? the IPCC might actually be right. Then we need to do much more research into the matter. And frankly the way that sates like California and Arguably the US at large relegate the problem is by attacking the smallest portion of it, namely drivers.

    Moreover, the way that grant money is bandied about in congress is based on alarm-ism, not actual fact. Medical grant seekers have for YEARS porkbarreled a “oh yeah it might cure cancer” onto the end of their proposals simply because it damn near guarantees them the grant. I have no reason to believe that climatologists have done a booming business before this, and perhaps the hookers and blow have run out since the 70’s Global cooling panic.

    moreover, The concept of “earth in the balance” is a flawed one. Earth is not a closed system, we orbit in a slowly decaying manner a massive uncontrolled nuclear fusion reaction. I have no reason to believe that energy output, from a celestial body capable of frying us at any moment with some seriously badass special effects (see: coronal mass ejection)Would not play a significant portion in the current tempurature of our planet. moreover, sunspot activity is starting to change, we’ve been in a solar cycle with vastly erratic activity, and certain scientists are predicting the new solar cycle will bring cooling. So we’ll wait and see.

    Zack, this comic is still unfunny, i don’t know what that woman was smoking, but it ain’t weed. Go have a bowl yourself, you’ll find the world a much easier place to live in.

  23. Go have a bowl yourself, you’ll find the world a much easier place to live in.

    I’ll leave all the other bruha aside for the moment, since we now have something approaching the surrealstic when it comes to a critique of a toon transposed over Things Gore and all his shenanigans, and not likely the on-board climatologists here will solve the funny or the serious in one swoop.


    Go have a bowl yourself, you’ll find the world a much easier place to live in.

    Hmmm…I suspect that Zack’s success in illustraion, and a creative storyline at that, is THE creative goal that the hippie-dippies who DO suffer from too much bong resin or malted barley THINK they’re getting from brain disturbances.

    So he’ll have no need of that.

    That’s not a statement of policy, but pragmatics.

  24. Yeah–the war on freedom.

    The Dark Night of Chenian/Bushian terror.

    Except that I find that outside the halls of theh ACLU, no one takes this seriously, and even the Sons of Allah are pining to be KEPT in GITMO’s tropical lockdown.

    How horrid. Ghastly.

    The salad is too warm and no one dresses properly for dinner…

    • Manuel Calavera
    • Posted November 5, 2009 at 2:30 pm
    • Permalink

    So I take it you’re against decriminalization Wakey? I’m for it, and I don’t care for the stuff. I tried it once just so I could…and I didn’t feel anything from it.

  25. Maneul I was not making any commentary on the legal status of that. I am aware of the arguement on both sides (it leads to worse things and is the jump off point of stronger dope, and has psychoactive effects that cigs don’t) vs. (let the states decide and it’s no biggie anyhow, and not worse tham Mom and Dad’s cigarettes and liquor cabinets, etc).

    But I was actually commenting on the fact the someone claimed Zack’s word of the real giggles and a broader mind on things could open up with pot.

    Which REGARDLESS of what one thinks about the legal issue, is hardly the case. Potheads are generally dullards.

    The worst troublemakers? No. But dullards.

    They might think they very mention of the letter “D” is hilarious when stoned, but that does not make potheads better cartoonists later in life.

    Also, poor Sierra’s issue was not so much that she got the heart attack from her stoner lifestyle, but rather that she got that because she takes (while on dope) some of these hilarious things far too seriously.

    Too bad some missed the gallows humor of that toon.

    Though I should point out that the Mexian dope lords will kill over minute amounts. I’ve seen the photos.

    Not recommended for those with weak stomachs.


  26. Thanks but no Zack, I teach English 1 not ‘Propaganda 101’, send them to Harvard instead. I think they’ll get more use of them than I will.

    • Manuel Calavera
    • Posted November 5, 2009 at 9:04 pm
    • Permalink

    what in the world is that supposed to mean/refer to vegas?

    And good point woot. Saved us from terrible Who & Jimi Hendrix songs too.

    • Sarah
    • Posted November 5, 2009 at 9:08 pm
    • Permalink

    You guys really don’t get it. From a completely apolitical standpoint, this comic is terrible. One of the first rules of cartooning is to show rather than tell. Instead of showing us, the readers, what happened in the comic, we have a static picture with the angry little girl telling us what happened. It’s very boring.

    Second, what exactly is the punchline? Obviously, this suffers from the fact that the angry little girl had to tell us what happened. The only punchline I can find is “environmentalist/pot-smoker strawman believes crazy thing; thinks mundane thing is actually crazy thing; has a heart attack.” I fail to see the humor in that. I could flip it on its back and turn it into a comic wherein an old staunch Republican, drunk out of his mind, sees a black man walking down the street, and, believing that the “negroes” have taken over, freaks out and has a heart attack. I doubt any of the liberal (or at least less conservative) posters here would find that funny, because it’s just a lazy jab at someone you disagree with. It’s just turning them into a strawman and making them say “I’M SO CRAZY AND DUMB.” It might instinctively make you feel good because it jives with your beliefs, but it’s not very funny.

    Honestly, this comic is nothing more than “conservativesploitation.” It’s incredibly poor quality, but so many people get taken in because it jives with their beliefs, and they sing its undue praises. It doesn’t provide any meaningful political insight, it just demonizes the “other side.” It’s just a cheap intellectual handjob; it feels good for a bit, but you get nothing else out of it.

    A whole lot of people need to take a step back and look at this comic objectively. Don’t worry, it won’t make you any less conservative to tell Zack that his shit stinks.

    • Tyrone
    • Posted November 5, 2009 at 11:29 pm
    • Permalink

    z, i get where youre coming from, i just dont agree that the way you did the cartoon delivers your message the best way. and thank u for finally responding to me like a person. i hope this will continue. maybe we can be homies one day.

  27. Manuel,

    I had asked Zack what the title of the book was and after he replied he offered to send me a couple of cases of them to use in my English classes.

    I was so busy with school that I didn’t get to check back right away so there are about 40 responses between Zack’s reply and mine.

    Hope that clears it up for you.

  28. Sarah, what age person are you?

    I’m not being ugly or intrusive or personal, but I’m curious as to your insights on life.

    From a completely apolitical standpoint, this comic (or any comic) is just simply a comic, and you either can get the humor embedded–or not.

    While some people might claim that pics tell a thousand words and all that jive, that’s one of the most UNTRUE statements out there, and much context can go missing. So most cartoonist add some words to fill in the gaps when you see something that in everyday life we’d also have to ask questions about.

    Every once in a while, if everyone is “hip to the jive”, you can have a cartoon where no words are needed. And some cartoons like this can be serious.

    That TOLES guy adds words to his toons in a MAD Magazine-styled “marginal” thoughts side department.

    Panic over minutia IS actually funny, Sarah. We see this kind of thing in everyday life. Most cartoonists of Right or Left operate in the same manner. Arrows and pointers (words) are quite often added for emphasis.

    Check around.

    No ideology is perfect, but memory serves to remind us that while many on the Left have moral intentions in addition to a piggish self-rightiousness, it was the Left that mostly bequeathed to us wild notions about Cosmic equality and PC diversity and other real-world unattainables, missives from our dolphin friends (“EEEEEEYYYYEEEYYEE”) and gave us the drug culture, venereal disease, big government glop programs, moral equivalency of animals to humans, RESPONSE to terror being on par with terror itself, Generation Valtrex, and the proposition that hippies who ate out of trash piles at Woodstock are now free to take the ship of State’s helm and be taken seriously.

    Deadly, but as Zack shows, funny to boot on more than one level.

    If you don’t like it here, you can go to other sites and attack conservatives with impunity and allegations of hypocrisy all day long.

    I’m sure Zack hopes, however, that HERE you might be a little better and wiser for the wear, like the brats who suffered through Willy Wonka’s funhouse adventures in glop and Loompas.

    • Wake
    • Posted November 6, 2009 at 8:10 am
    • Permalink

    Also, Sarah, this hyperbolic nonsense about the alleged Repub fear of “negros” is vastly over the line, and historically inaccurate. Perhaps the latest smear tactic running amock claims that the GOP “hates” blacks due to issues regarding government services, but that old TRUE strawman is the same spurious charge as “racism” at every turn. Thus for example if you don’t like Gangsta rap or increased DSS services for illegal immigrants, you’re deemed “racist.”

    How convenient.

    But take heart you’re not alone, Sarah, as we now have an Attorney General whose take on those ugly Tea Party Terrorists being a source of racism and homegrown terror are jiving close to other libs.

    • thesecolorsdontrun
    • Posted November 6, 2009 at 2:57 pm
    • Permalink

    Wake, your insanely vitriolic attitude toward the mention of zack having a bowl is way out of proportion. Also its funny that you presume to speak for him. I mean, god forbid he actually loosened his collar a little. It’d just crush your little world. I know of plenty of folk down south who grew and voted republican, and the two are not mutually exclusive.

    Also seriously your approach to weed is akin to accusing someone of alcoholism for having a single beer.
    I just want zack to mellow out.
    I did not advocate that he attune his chakras and attempt to join in oneness with the godhead. I didn’t say he should spin some marley. Just spark up a bowl. It’d do wonders for his blood pressure.

    Moreover if you think weed’s only purpose is to unlock creativity, you’re a moron. It’s not prescribed to injured people for creative purposes. (creative REASONS for perscription is another matter entirely).

    As we all know, living in this horrendous obama controlled age with the liberal thought police busting down your door at every moment to take away your bibles, is a stressfull situation. I’m merely advocating a form of relaxation that won’t get you busted hardcore by the liberal agenda, see?
    Bipartisanship at its finest.

    • Sarah
    • Posted November 6, 2009 at 5:07 pm
    • Permalink

    “Also, Sarah, this hyperbolic nonsense about the alleged Repub fear of “negros” is vastly over the line, and historically inaccurate.”

    Congratulations, you got half of my point. A shame you don’t get the other half. Hmm, let’s see, who else has recently made a hyperbolic, inaccurate depiction of a certain group recently…

    • Wakefield
    • Posted November 8, 2009 at 12:36 pm
    • Permalink


    In order for something to be even in RANGE of humor, there needs to be some semblence to reality.

    It was the Dems who historically gave us the ditties of slavery and then Jim Crow. That was the legacy. Nice try. You get brownie points for the inverse relation you attempted, but the problem here is that with the other libs you don’t understand context. ALSO on the lefty side of historical oddness and lack of memory is the very weird and very real snottery combined with a piggish self-rightiousness combined in turn with the very real problem of radical seriousness abuot the world and scare stories like global warming.

    Thus I present to you poor Sierra’s trip to the paramedics.

    • Wakefield
    • Posted November 8, 2009 at 12:51 pm
    • Permalink

    Color Man,

    I’m not sure even where to begin dissecting all that, other than to assure you that an aversion to the grand world of dope is not really akin to vitrole.

    That word would carry more weight in your snide comments on the other thread to Steve T. It was, granted, of little effect and odd then, but at least in that realm I’ll give you the credit you sought and fought for so earnestly as far as a strategy.

    Whether intentional or not, you very much used a clever playbook.

    I have no come here to preach against drugs or to delve into other people’s take on such.

    As far as this, however:

    Moreover if you think weed’s only purpose is to unlock creativity, you’re a moron

    I don’t recall saying that was the one and only reason people smoke dope, but rather than that statement has been made in relation to drugs more than once. And we all know it by now. As far as chilling out, I’m quite sure that Zack, as a responsible adult, knows how to get that accomplished without the help of psychoactive drugs.

    Because if you don’t, and you’re merely going beyond happy-fun time for stoners seeking escape from reality (which remains the plupart reasons for drug use) the you need the kind of help I can’t provide in a forum.

    That’s not my bag, and I’m not that man.

    I am well aware of the issues surrounding this and all the usual allegations of hypocrisy for mom’s cig packs around the house and dad’s handy liquor cabinet. But that pulls things off tracks and dosen’t solve with any finality the issue itself.

    And no, I don’t presume to speak for Zack any more than anyone else here.

    He’s a big guy; but I did want to respond to this assumption that pot is some magic vaporous elixer that helps unwind.

    I understand the issue of so-called “prescriptions”–which as predicted seem to be expanding now to mere headaches, heartache, backache, toothache, mental fugue, and a host of other maladies both real and imagined which are a perfect fit for a nation of hypochondriacs and the new Cyberchondriacs.

    Perhaps you intended this to be funny. Good. Cyberchondriasis is sorta funny too.

    Not speaking for Zack again, but more likely the cathartic release from tensions of the day is what he does here, which is creative input via his toons.

    • Buckitz
    • Posted November 11, 2009 at 9:18 am
    • Permalink

    I’m going to have to agree with Zack’s remark on left-leaning people and the tendency to be cranky.
    There seems to be “Never enough.”, and nothing ever seems good enough.
    My family never seems happy, though they all have access to such nice things, not just material things.
    I’ve just learned that I’m the ‘hippy’ in my family, because of my lifestyle choices, and they are the steadfast true harbingers of middle class values. I’m happy with what I have, and they are forever reaching for more.
    I guess it all boils down to clothes.

  29. on left-leaning people and the tendency to be cranky.

    Makes one wonder.

    Also, they tend to be a wee bit predictible.

    The latest incident at Ft. Hood, is of course Bush’s fault.

    • thesecolorsdontrun
    • Posted November 11, 2009 at 12:09 pm
    • Permalink


    Your detailed overanalysis of a throwaway stab that zack could use some relaxation has led me to believe you must be from some other time, place, or dimension that is not our own.

    Perhaps we got off on the wrong foot, so let me greet you properly,

    Hail and well met, star traveler. Contained withing these words are often humorous over-exaggerations of ideas or behaviors, a thing we earthlings like to call “jokes”
    Perhaps when you spend some time among us, while your timecraft is repaired, you might come to understand them.

  30. …and that’s the OTHER problem evident here from Color Man; what a horrible waste of water and space for growing things, has pot become.

    I think we’re done with all the “Good morning Starshine, the Earth says hello!” stuff for now. You govern your reality in your way, we’ll use ours. Deal?

    That’s just droll to me anyhow.

    As to the above about Steve T’s alleged murderous impulses, and your continuing theme here (albeit utterly devoid of real-world context about war) in this regard–the repetitive and numerous similar type postings that are certainly NOT part of some throwaway jest about herbal treatments?

    All I can say is that when it comes to treatment options for PTSD, you might be on the docket far in front of the line more than anyone else here, battle-weary or not.

    It appears that regardless of whatever others have going on here, your demons are rather personal.

    Cast them out, brother.

    • thesecolorsdontrun
    • Posted November 11, 2009 at 2:28 pm
    • Permalink

    my demons are not personal, rather they’re people. People like steve T who cower behind a badge of service in a questionable war, and then insult people who are different than him, and actively supports an agenda aimed at preventing rights from being bestowed to people besides him and those that think like him.

  31. Heavens to Betsy, TCDR, that brings up other questions.

    Though I guess, like Mayor Daley’s snide remarks, no better time for such a snark could be found than Veterans Day, eh?

    I’m not going to rehash the war here, but if you’re truly tormented by those fighting the Sons of Allah, or don’t feel this threat is real or proximate to the goals of stanching terror, AND you feel unduly alarmed by the Bush/Chenian Age of Horror that kicked in your doors at night, gagged you with duct tape, and made people beg like dogs for mercy in the middle of the night, OR just snooped in on Aunt Millie’s secret cake recipes?

    I suggest this is not the forum for you.

    Anyhow: Are you under the impression that you’ll change the terrain here?

    Last but not least–and realizing I’m wasting my time also in pointing out that liberals gather like gnats around sex and pot issues but really don’t care so much for the actual metaphysical freedoms around us that need tapping into on occasion–I’ll point out also that if you move beyond the rectal-pump rights as “marriage” being proffered on the West Coast and elsewhere, we find that when it comes to the possibility of fines and imprisonment for NOT doing something (say, signing up for ObamaCare glop), that sure as hell takes all cakes.

    Nothing beats ObamaCare, it’s frowsy performance, threats, liabilities, and untold cost overruns too, when it comes to the real definition of tyranny. THIS ObamaCare crap sandwhich which is not even financable under threat, is a FAR more prodound assault on the very notion of responsible stewardship and citizenry that anything regarding “rights” to have certain activities renamed, or to blow dope and pretend that the Mexican drug lords don’t get a cut of all this.

    No greater asinine idiocy and threat can be made than FORCING people to participate in something.

    Clamor and groan about that, and we’ll be closer to the same page on many things.

    • thesecolorsdontrun
    • Posted November 11, 2009 at 3:46 pm
    • Permalink

    Forcing people to participate in something? Oh you mean the way that your party’s adamant opposition to same sex marriages forces homosexuals of people to live as second class citizens?

    Or the way that certain members of the right wing would like to force women to bear children inflicted on them in instances of rape, or instance, or even if such an act might kill her? Better a four day blob of nonthinking-unsentient cells than a living breathing thinking woman, eh wake?

    Forcing me to participate in the morally reprehensible position of bowing to the insane whims of corporate run health care which will choose their bottom line over human life time and time again or suffer with illness in the streets like a dog? (which you’ll die like anyway if the words “pre-existing condition” are magically appended to your claims)

    Also for the record, I’m now referring to all sexual intercourse as “$bodypart pumping” as per the appropriate parts involved.
    I can’t believe a rational level headed man like you could come up with such an un-loaded, non-connotative, respectful term for what two people do in the bedroom.

    But on the issue of forcing people, You’re right Wake, and because it is so asinine to be forced into an untenable position. So I can and will continue to fight bravely against it, as you suggest.

    • thesecolorsdontrun
    • Posted November 11, 2009 at 3:50 pm
    • Permalink

    egads, typos abound. I sincerely apologize for that one.

    please note the following addendum:

    “Homosexuals of people” should just be read “homosexuals”

    and please append an “or what about” just prior to the “forcing me to participate in the morally…”

    Thank you for your understanding.

  32. It’s a definitional issue.

    “Marriage” was engineered by entire cultures–not politicians. It existed prior to what we call “government” and can be recognized as having legal implications, yes, but stands above and apart from approval in fact. The “recognition” afforded is one of pragmatics. There are some differences in application and ceremony, but the main focus is cross-generational care of the young. It was always thus.

    You can marry any time you like. But to a woman. Just as you’re not stripped of your inherent “rights” to use shovels and dig in your yard–so long as you don’t muff it and hit the powerlines or gas mains.

    Again, the definitional quality to this strips no one of their core rights. Gays can have their pals visit in the hospital, inherit property, and all the other accoutrements of life. You can even bestow property to your pet cat if you like. They can live together and play house and do all the things other couples do and even get into fights and throw things at each other.

    Likewise, with some terms, you can be a Harvard scholar if you like, yeah, but you have to QUALIFY. That is not bestowed by some magical quality of the law–and neither is marriage. There is a difference between the “rights” level of something and the QUALIFICATION level of something.

    I have the “right” to be a movie star stud making stacks of cash and having a lady on both arms. Or a major sports figure who at 5’11 can sink the basketball like Abdul Jabar never could. I have that RIGHT to persue.

    It is unlikely, however, that I’d QUALIFY for any of that.

    There’s a difference.

    Marriage does sometimes occur for reasons other than children production or raising the next generation, true. But the main focus has always been that, and even among the childless the focusing of the sexual urge into proper hetero-relations assures that the older man will not interfere in the more productive life and relations of the younger man or woman.

    Marriage is a pragmatic cultural and societal arrangement, as well as a legal one.

    As to the other issue, if the Bambi administration wishes instead to embark on something rational, rather than Nancy Egg-Eyes 2000 page glop of sumptuous goodies and handouts and provisions that in large measure don’t even have much to do with “health care per se, so much as PC crappola and pet projects ladled out, THEN I’d suggest he pitches for making REAL competition.

    We have about 1400 health insurance carriers nationwide, but in some states the STATE law decrees you can choose from a grand total of 3 or 4, and can’t cross lines even on the Net to make other purchases.

    Obama’s bonehead solution is to tell us that (in contradistinction to EVERYTHING we know about the long history of all government cost overruns and bureaucratic management and rationing that makes the private insurers look like spendthrifts) now we need “government” competition.

    OF course, this will turn out to be no more real than the long-standing competition to the grumps at the Post Office, the DMV, and the vapid doltism of the public schools.

    Sure thing–the “public option.”

    In the final analysis, government suffers no one to COMPETE at the same level. Why would they bother. It’s a damn great scam when you’re the only game in town.

    The only exceptions are politicians and celebrities and certain workers in the bureacracy.

    Britain’s mighty NHS lets SOME of her more esteemed citizens escape and leapfrog the 10-month MRI waiting lists by paying hard cash, though the rest of them get to be what YOU claim to suffer for another issue–being a REAL second class citizen and then sitting at the kiddie table.

    Ask yourself if Ted Kennedy’s aged carcass was hauled off to FAIT DU CANADA! or Cuba’s, or Britain’s “advanced” care for his condition. Horsecrap. And we know it.

    Apparently for the dear leaders in our life, the Frankenstinian muck-ups, private corporate “shills”, and the med-school rejects at the Mayo Clinic are just FINE AND DANDY, eh?

    Let those politicians sign up at the damned DMV along with the growing queue of 10,000 anchor baby moms stretching out the local DSS door and we’ll talk.

    Fat chance. Pelosi is not going to get her Botox injections and upgrades to fix her egg eyes at the local clinic, dude. Really now.

    I could go on about this, and there is some great research background on the whole “health” care bruha, including stats about overseas performance as well as the fact that most Americans don’t feel trapped as you do by the evil sultans of corporate greed (in the world’s 86th most profitable job–health insurance) and the demonization of those guys, as well as the fact that this is now going to be a shill for illegal aliens and then the whole issue of FORCING people to buy something. My God. But enough.

    You’ve no notion of “second class”………..YET….

    Soon enough, brother.

    Sorry, imperfect as it may be, give me the truly open market over the crap doled out by our alleged “betters” in some DSS office.

  33. ..and then there is just the philosphical angle to all this health care glop.

    No one has the right to make you pay for their ailment’s treatment. Just as I don’t force people to buy my van or green tea at the World Market or the morning coffee.

    What the minority pitching for such really believe is that it is thus moral to make virtual slaves our of their fellow human beings, and having a mortgage-like control over the other guy’s destiny, in fact.

    Further, this kind of thing will HAVE to be rationed in order to be fully implemented, and Robert Reich and some others like TR Reid have already spilled the beans on what this means in the end–it means that there will be far less innovation, treatment options, and other things that, while expensive, at least can be looked at with the current system.

    I’d rather be in hock than dead.

    Socialised meds are fine for giving shots, wiping the noses of kids, and if you’re tough enough to withstand 18 months for an MRI follow-up for a lung condition and live to get the screening. Reid for his part has made the comment that all this is just dandy, as the real intent (and I thank him for the honesty) is about VENGEANCE against capitalism and wealth, more so than real concerns of health care.

    Also implied in this, as we already see in most nations that have this shit sandwhich of universal care, is that lifestyle will be altered and/or monitored.

    Socialised (single payer is just a euphamism) care is the best way yet for government to keep tabs on people and make fantastic reasons for monitoring of the populace of the type seemed to have gotten under your skin regarding telephone calls from the Sons of Allah vis-a-vis George Bush.

    But for the frail side of life, it’s a losing bet.

    Lastly, UNLIKE the Eurotrash brethren who use this to control the populace, our side of the Pond is less forthright about all the crap we add under legislative slight-of-hand, like all the PC provisions, taxpayer funded abortions, and the lying about this not applying to illegal aliens (the courts will assure that it does, and the Harvard grad Prez damn well knows it).

    At least we can say that Britain’s NHS does what it mostly says it does–frowsy, half-assed care, minus all the American PC glop added on to shake down certain Senators. Though the Eurotrashers DO still use Socialized Meds as a way of other types of control, unfortunately.

    Also, unlike Bambi’s administration, the Eurotrash have one more thing to their credit–they never lied about their ultimate intentions, as are most liberals and the dear leaders in the House.

    They said they’d make most private insurance illegal–and so they damned well did.

    Here, we’re still being told at the 11th hour–and buying the bullshit–that this is MERELY a “competition” to private health insurance, conveniently not telling people about Obama’s speech where he boasted of getting rid of the health care insurers completely after a few years or so, and not detailing the experience of states like Hawaii, where a condition called “crowd out” (bet you haven’t heard that term from your Senator, eh?????) basically pushed out all the private insurers by default until the SCHIP law was scaled back somewhat.

  34. Homophobe, yet another media creation and myth, of course implies that I fear homosexuals, which is laughable.

    Don’t come around here staining everything with PC platitudes, Ken.

    THAT is what is truly vile–and disgusting.

    And it’s not my issue that you don’t understand analogies, or the very concept of marriage.

    Why on earth should there be any legal standing for an act that is neither procreative nor has any cross-generational relevence other than fun time?

    That’s not what marriage is about. IN the ancient world, marriage had little to do with this Modernist interpretation of “love”–it was a societal contract, and didn’t involve all the stuff about one’s toes curling and all the little fluffy hearts and Valentine’s gifts. While it might be true that modern society has lost touch with the past, that’s not my issue when it comes to the real roots of true marriage.

    Your take on this indicates that any arrangement is just fine, but that would lead (and some Mormon leaders are even taking note here on the legalities, as are some hippy-dippy types) to polygamy and even poly-amory and all the unfolding confusion therein.
    The gay lobby’s numerous bullies don’t comprehend this, of course.

    At the end of the day, they, like you, are just another moron with a chip on the shoulder and a disconnect from culture.

    Many gay leaders themselves have forthrightly acknowledged that the real goal here is not even marriage per se, but rather the destruction of marriage by making the very concept trivial and thus legally meaningless, as a way of radicalizing the culture.

    It’s not about marriage; it is about forcing acceptance of a vile practice and making the wider culture take note of one’s bedroom antics.

    • Steve T
    • Posted November 12, 2009 at 11:53 am
    • Permalink

    In Latin, “homo” means human being, or man.
    [See ‘homocide’ – murder of another human.]

    Now, enter the leftist-liberal ‘PC’ culture, and all the ignorant minions who swallow their deceitful propaganda.

    “homophobe” means what-? Literally, it means the phobia of another man, or human.
    Wow-!…that means a bunch-!

    Latin is not an ‘evolving’ language. What it means is fixed, is an intransigent fact.

    How about ‘homosexual-phobe’-?

    What part of the NORMAL (heterosexual) community parades around announcing specific or particular intimate practices they prefer-?

    Given all the medical costs, from all the diseases, infections and other medical complications known to result from promiscuous homosexual behavior – should Obama impose a ‘queer tax’, to pay for these-?

    If too many common-sense questions are asked of this “gay” orthodoxy, their mentally-ill, maladaptive & twisted behavior will become more and more obvious.

    I submit the “closet” is a good place for this sub-culture of risky behavior to retreat back to.

    How are your ‘F-E-E-LINGS’ now, little Ken-?

    • Locothrope
    • Posted November 12, 2009 at 1:38 pm
    • Permalink

    Steve: You’ve never been to or heard of bondocon in NY, Sexfest in Europe, or any other number of Kink-related events. You’ll find a large contingent of heterosexual couples there.
    As for heterosexual Pride day, I nominate the ubiquitous St. Patricks day parades. Get loud, be drunk, start fights? Sounds like everything your traditional idea of masculinity needs? What about Tractor Pulls,NASCAR, or every Hooters in America?

    Steve you seem to be misinformed.
    promiscuous behavior, regardless of sexual orientation, is one of the major contributing factors to STDs. Not w Herpes and syphilis have been around well before modern times and sensibilities acknowledged the existence of an alternative sexual orientation.

    Oh and steve if you want pride parades to go away, let gays get married, they won’t have anything to complain about.

    Also wake, do you consider anal sex between a man and a woman a vile practice that needs to be done away with?

    • Mark
    • Posted November 12, 2009 at 1:58 pm
    • Permalink

    Loco: “Oh and steve if you want pride parades to go away, let gays get married, they won’t have anything to complain about.

    Absolute rubbish. They won’t stop until EVERYBODY loudly cheers at the mere mention of unhealthy sex practices as they organize the next kindergarten excursion to a ‘marriage’ between 3 men, 2 cats, a tree and sunny days. Anybody who declines will be thrown in jail for 20 years for being homo-felo-planto-sunno-phobic. Then, and only then will we finally have true ‘tolerance’ and ‘diversity’.

    Loco: “Also wake, do you consider anal sex between a man and a woman a vile practice that needs to be done away with?”

    Considering that men who engage sexually with other men are kind of compelled to have anal sex and men and women who have, you know, normal sex that their bodies are designed for, can avoid it, the question is a blatant smokescreen. But consider this information in relation to the spread of AIDS/HIV via vaginal sex vs anal sex:

    Vagina: Elastic fibres present
    Rectum: NO elastic fibres
    V: 25-40 cells thick wall
    R: 1 cell
    V: Ph low (acidic) – inactivates the virus
    R: Ph higher
    V: No M cells
    R: M cells present. Their function? To attract foreign particles for transmission to the immune system – the very target of HIV.

    The rectum is setup to absorb. It is part of the digestive system.

    Yeah, sure – I’ll buy the whole ‘second-class citizen’ argument based on avoidable behaviour… NOT.

    • Locothrope
    • Posted November 12, 2009 at 2:19 pm
    • Permalink

    But what if the men and the woman happen to enjoy anal sex? is this a vile practice? What’s wrong with a man and a woman enjoying something that gives them pleasure?

    Anal sex isn’t necessarily the problem but less-safe sexual practices like unprotected sex with multiple partners IS.

    Also, seriously, you’re packing a host of paranoid delusions. I mean on the one hand you and people like you love to talk about how Sissy gays are, but then the next moment you’re terrfied of some mythical force of jackbooted stormtroopers enforcing a gay empire. Which is it? Are they limpwristed nancy boys or a truely terrifying force to be reckoned with?

  35. Mr. Misanthrope,

    It is FAR from likely that most of these parades of goop-gobbling and cranial rectosis will go away with the addition and then recognition of legal status. Heterosexual couples attend the semen squirt parades and Rocky Horror look-alike contests on Folsom Street in San Fran as well as the gays jacking off and pissing on each others shirts, right in front of people bringing their children.

    This is merely a celebration–as are those Euro-trash versions you mentioned and we all know about by now from Amsterdam’s seedy side (most of it) of sex in general. And the gay side a thonged fannies and beef jerky on display is not going anywhere.

    And we all know it.

    Yes, heteros have little room to talk among some of us, due to the fact that indeed, Generation Valtrex got it’s start mostly in regular relations gone astray from marriage back in the Woodstock days of screwing in damned broad daylight in addition to spreading VD in the love clan tent and covering your ring ringers with “devils bands” (bandaids) to hide even the last residual amount of guilt over humping someone else’s spouse, etc.

    Yes, we all know that, brother.

    But that recognition proves nothing, and neither does you jeremiad on the familiar troubles of promiscuity in whatever form it takes. I am no more impressed by boisterous crap at bondocons and obnoxious hicks grabbing their crotches on Saturday night telling their “buds” about needin’ some pussy juice, etc, than any other kind of vulgarity, be it gay or straight.

    And most whores are comfortably hetero, too. Yep.

    So what?

    In the first place, Europe is not a good example of enlightened mentioned of sex of any type: Europeans are in a moribund state of denial about it’s slide into the moral sewer, and exactly as it makes marriage take a backseat to just fun time in what amounts to childless sex, it is soon to go into a demographic death spiral. The Sons of Allah, whatever we think of them, at least have the audacity to have rugrats from their sexual activity, and they don’t pill it, pop it, pierce it, abort it, nor medicate their products of conception. They fill maternity wards the Continent over, with the name “Mohammed” now supplanting “Jack” as the number one boys name in Britain.

    Europe is enjoying the moment in the sun. Many civilizations in decline can be like that according to many historians. Fabulous places to be doing little more all day than less than a full workday, sucking down wine on the beach on mandated 8 week vacations, and filling their void lives with mostly childless sex, empty maternity wards (for the native populace) and giving little thought about how they’ll pay for the ever busy old folks homes that socialized ways have to pay for somehow.

    Gosh–thank GOODNESS for all those Islamist immigrants–THEY’ll put things to rights, eh???

    Yeah. I’m sure they will.

    And their other dopey policies, like the liberalization of dope and whoredom, is not doing them many favors, what with the testimonies of more than a few travelers indicating that Holland is not fun in some districts due all the sluts sliding on poles looking for a quickie and the used needles now filling up parks and grassy areas.

    So YES, we know full well that most sexual problems are squarely from heteros.

    This does NOT justify extending our woes by legal fiat. And the hot spunk on the street is not going away due to some legal provision. Areas like Folsom are there to annoy for the joy of annoying. Nothing more. Nothing less.

    This is analogous to that old saw about how mom has his liquor and mom her Marlboro Lights, so what’s the big deal about pot and cocaine, eh? So why not legalize everything you can sniff, smoke, inhale, or inject, right? But it does not necessarily follow.

    There are cultural issues to tackle here also: For example, cigs and booze were around in common culture long ages before other things came into fashion, and we didn’t have all the info on the other “sin” habits of adults for those items like we now have on other things.

    Second, it is poor reasoning to say that if one nasty thing is legal, all should be. Even IF you have an acknowledged situation of hypocrisy.

    As to rectal pumping among men and women, while that too has some sordid history and some engage in that, I don’t recommend that either. It is VERY dangerous, can lead to all manner of disease, and at the very least leads eventually to incontinence in women’s rectums and often the need for surgery to correct.

    The anus is NOT even a decent second-hand vagina, was not built for that purpose, and can’t handle (like the muscular vagina can) all that pounding. The vagina has muscular tissue and is lined to handle high levels of friction. The rumpy is not. It is fragile and is meant to process liquids and waste products through a thin lining.

    Most women do NOT like even the suggestion of this. And if she has any sense and is not a whore, she’ll scratch your eyeballs from the sockets if you seriously pursue the issue.

    As to BANNING the practice?

    I don’t recall advocating that even for gays. I don’t care what people do in the sack, and I’m not voyeuristic enough to care. But I simply said the act was vile. And people should now and appreciate the dangers of such things.

    As to enjoyment of such?

    Well, some people enjoy putting gerbils up their butts and getting horsewhipped. I can’t speak for that, but only point out that by vile I mean only that term, and not one of legal status one way or another.

  36. PS–besides, if I really want a female whose tail looks either torn up and swollen, or shines bright red like the monkey butts at the zoo, I’ll just go over to Riverbanks Zoological Society and ask the keepers to show me the female baboon in the troop.

    • thesecolorsdontrun
    • Posted November 12, 2009 at 5:35 pm
    • Permalink

    Wake, don’t do that, you’ll make the government bring in dustin hoffman and THEN where will we be?

    • Locothrope
    • Posted November 12, 2009 at 6:04 pm
    • Permalink


    So if you honestly find the promiscuity of the entire thing the crux of the problem, why do you believe that marriage is bad? With no ability to provide an alternative to being single, you encourage the promiscuous lifestyle.

    For example:
    A heterosexual man is a player or a don juan when single, but put a ring on his finger and now he’s a two-timing bastard who is now frowned upon for the same behavior. But when you don’t have that latter option, his promiscuity must REALLY get out of hand in order to be anything of note.

    Is it so impossibly immoral if two men or two women were to have a monogamous relationship with one another? I mean, it’s not as if they are not already contributing to society for the most part (a very generalized statement I’m sure there are homosexuals who are not contributing members to society, same as every other cross-section of the population)

    I’m pretty sure if you gave marriage rights to Homosexuals, and allowed them to build a monogamous life with all the benefits that entails, there’d be some internal social pressure to calm the faaaaabulous fringe down. I mean, sure there will always be a contingent of gadfly provocateurs there, but that’s the way things are for everything, but when you normalize things, you remove the NEED for such displays of brazen solidarity. And open it up to criticism. Like public indecency.
    Pride parades evolved because nobody wanted to admit that there are some people who just happen to love members of their own gender. So they responded with forcing people to acknowledge their existence, and the shocking thought that they were actually y’know, people, not monsters.

    When you allow this to be valid, your more insane demonstrations will die down, and frankly, I have a distinct feeling that when those calm down, everyone will get a chance to see how relatively normal gay people honestly are.

    • Locothrope
    • Posted November 12, 2009 at 6:07 pm
    • Permalink

    Oh also, wake, you really don’t know anything about anal sex do you? The muscles present in the rectum are half of the reason, and frankly, if you pound any orifice like crazy it’s going to get worn out and ratty looking, seriously, there’s a reason people make jokes about “arby’s sandwhiches”

  37. you really don’t know anything about anal sex do you

    Even if so, my first response would be “Thank GOD for small favors, dude.”

    Yes, you can overdo anything. You can tear up a damned battleship using one grapefruit spoon after another, if you’re really that determined.

    But vaginal sex for a healthy woman generally does not pose that much of a risk even in brisk and rough intercourse other than the very common fear of pregnancy, which is the real bugbear for some gals more than getting VD or ripped by Captain PowerBeef.

    As to the other, well now, haven’t heard the Arby’s thing:

    But that sure puts another spin on the commercial I saw the other day for I’m thinkin’ Arby’s

    I know from my contact at a major health insurance carrier, however, that while some info is private under HIPPA and no names can be released, they ARE known to the claims processors, and anal penetration seems the main cause for gay men having to have all manner of rectal surgery and treatments for ripped meat.

    • Steve T
    • Posted November 12, 2009 at 9:24 pm
    • Permalink


    I heard a fun little tid-bit:

    One day, after the lawsuits broke all traditions and the St. Patrick Days Parade had to submit to the demands of the homosexual-rights activists, two co-captains were appointed to lead the following St. Patricks Day parade;

    Michael Fitzpatrick
    Patrick Fitzmichael

    Sooooo special and inclusive-!!!!!

    • Manuel Calavera
    • Posted November 12, 2009 at 11:45 pm
    • Permalink

    And your point Stevey? Where was this, when was it, etc. These details are relevant if you wish to make a point.

    • Steve T
    • Posted November 13, 2009 at 1:30 am
    • Permalink

    You are a poster-child example of;
    – Liberals cannot spell
    – Liberals have no sense of humor

    • Manuel Calavera
    • Posted November 13, 2009 at 9:53 am
    • Permalink

    Don’t tell me I can’t spell when you can’t get my name write Stevey :3. I don’t see how your post is a joke, or what I may have misspelled. Plus, yknow, you didn’t address my question, you just went with insults *again*.

    I’ve said it before and I’ll say it again. If anyone here is a troll, it’s you.

    • thesecolorsdontrun
    • Posted November 13, 2009 at 1:26 pm
    • Permalink

    So now that the homosexuals have infiltrated the bastions of St. Paddy’s day, has there been any significant change to the point of the assembly? Y’know, all that getting slammed, and acting all buckwild?

  38. With no ability to provide an alternative to being single, you encourage the promiscuous lifestyle.

    Horsemess. That just sounds like some cheap threat that if gays can’t marry they’ll be forever parading up and down Folsom Street acting like naked clowns. WHAT–is that some kind of threat??

    But married heteros engage in this burlesque horseplay too–so what’s your point? That all this will be suddenly derailed if we move the category for gays from “domestic partnership” to a mere name change of “married.” Highly doubtful proposition. Most straights can’t manage their skirts and zippers very well. But there are stern gays and straights alike who don’t wander or troll around looking for the next meat market or bar, either. There are many single people who are hetero to the core of their very being, who don’t go humping around town. Promiscuity is across the board, true. But on that note, so is a more noble approach, and this includes gays as well as straights who know that regardless of marital status, it is not a good idea to hit the town all the time. Gays have the same ability as either straight celibates or straight monogamous types who merely have live-in boyfriends or ladyfriends to remain loyal to the cause. Marriage is therefore not the answer you seek.

    Besides, I’ve not come here to outlaw gayness as a persona, or attitude or feeling,

    As CS Lewis and other metaphysicists have pointed out, your sexuality is how you ARE, more so than what you do. This was also echoed by theologian Peter Kreeft, who pointed out gender is an identity–not a style.

    50% of all marriages in the West end in divorce, and so this indicates that the very modern concept of marriage is more about selfish interests not being met and lack of maturity when entering into what should be a very sober and compromising contract for individual needs, etc. So this is honestly NOT a very good template or example, by the admission of many of us straights, for solving some other groups issues.

    Gays and straights likely have similar dispositions in such matters, and it is unlikely matters of flesh and heart and commitment would be any better in a gay “marriage” contract than it is for straights (though the legal issue is important for raising kids) and I might add that the LACK of marriage among straights is not the reason for promiscuity.

    Promiscuity justifies it’s own ways, and wanderlust is not solved by marriage. Those who’re committed in ANY kind of relationship are likely the way they are not for legal reasons, but religious or cultural reasons.

    What about gays in relationships who’re monogamous? Do they not exist outside of the M-word “marriage”? Of course they do. Domestic partnership is something already known to legal customs in most states. No?

    I freely admit the marriage model today is a lousy one. Odd that others who disdain it in other forums as an old-fashioned old fogey thing now seek to make it into something more noble, when the majority of liberals and gays–especially from the feminist camp–were often heard saying that for women marriage was a rotten deal and akin to be a slave to a man. Or as Gloria Steinem used to say “I won’t mate in captivity.” She later changed her mind, but the point is that this commentary from the radicals was common, and some gay leaders to this day spill the beans on this, IMHO, when they proclaim that their ultimate goal in all this “marriage talk” is to just have the very concept trivialized worse than it already is, and then end the concept of marriage as we know it and replace it with polyamory and other loose connections. I think the whole gay emphasis on marriage is phony and very transparent. It is absurd, as most of the allies of gays like the feminists and radical left have always HATED the marriage contract as modern slavery, and feel it to actually be a threat to the necessary power of the state, etc.

    While freely admitting that heteros have butchered the meaning of marriage and done it great injustice, it is ODD that the gay community finds any favor in what the Left used to deem an oppressive, old-fashioned tradition of biddies and fusspots and prudes, or that the ugly twisting of marriage and the sour divorce stats don’t serve as a warning that this is hardly a panacea for change and honor for gays.

Comments are closed.

%d bloggers like this: