I Am Going to Make You Laugh Randomly For the Next Day or So

You don’t believe me?  OK, come back here tomorrow, and be honest.  Tell me how many times this made you laugh in 24 hours.

Well, it works on me.  Every once in awhile, it occurs to me anew that the words “doing” and “going” look like they should be sound effects, like “DOING!” and “GOING!” (Rhymes with “BOING!”)

At times such as these, every time I read these words in context, it makes me laugh at random.  Like, what are you DOING! right now?  Where are you GOING!?!

Maybe it’s just me.

Also, if a paper doll has multiple sexual partners, is that origamy?



  1. You used to do stand-up right? I can see why the operative words in that sentence are “used to”.

    Next, you are going to start giggling about the words <a href=”http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TiAcYxCvha8″road and limit.

  2. HTML error: road and limit

  3. You dickbag

  4. I am GOING to try and laugh if it kills me!

    And it may.

  5. Yo. I don’t see your article re: Palin, but, apparently some thought you were rude last night (although, I didn’t notice it) but I will say here, I love ya dog, but, I think you’re wrong.

    You ripped me for showing the alternative argument and denied it was there. Not what position is right or wrong, but, you deny the existence of another path:

    Replay from PM: YOU MAKE CUBE ANGRY! (not really, but, I don’t buy your argument en toto)

    Cube1:55PMMar 17th 2009

    Tommy’s great, but (con todo respecto) does not write the conservative alternative argument to reject the nominees. Here’s the Washington Post’s summary of it which sounds vaguely familiar to an alternative argument from a conservative perspective (I do not agree with but recognize that it exists) outlining another tack she COULD have taken. Someone made this identical argument last night. Not as being dispostive. Rather, another an alternative theory.

    Everyone seems to get tunnelvision on all sides. Just because I think (and Tommy does) Palin made the right call, does not mean that’s the only call she could have made, or that it was done as an honest broker. Why? Here’s a question. Without the constraint of the nominations, what type of judge would she have chosen? Further, her “it’s the Constitution” is a pretextual defense set up to deflect right wing arguments she sold out to pro choice groups. Don’t believe me? Look what conservatives are saying — she should have rejected the nominations and fought. SOUND FAMILIAR???

    “Some conservatives have suggested Mrs. Palin should have rejected both candidates by sending them back to the panel. Former Alaska Gov. Frank Murkowski employed a similar tactic to protest previous judicial candidates, but was unsuccessful in getting the panel to give him more choices.

    Mr. McAllister dismissed that option, saying his boss “followed the constitution” and “had to pick among two people, which is the way it is set up.”

    He noted that several other states use a similar process to choose judges. Former Missouri Gov. Matt Blunt, a Republican who represented the state where the model originated, strongly opposes it.

    Some conservatives don’t see the Alaska Constitution as an excuse.

    “The fact she wasn’t willing to stand up and fight this is something (they) will seriously question on the national stage,” Family Research Council Action Vice President Tom McCluskey said.”

    Regardless as to whether one feels this is a futile effort which might only end in a Pyrrhic victory, that does not equate to the use of the word “force” in the headline. Nor does it imply violating Alaska’s constitution. Rejecting a nominee is well within a governors plenary powers. While it may go no where, she could have rejected them. Like governors in the past. That they ultimately failed is entirely irrelevant. Some conservatives wanted her to fight for a pro-life judge and this will be viewed by some in the right wing as an example of her caving to the left. Murtowski fought. Palin didn’t. The option was hers. She chose the path of least resistance with an embedded out regarding the constitution that is bogus. She had a right to reject and lose. A right to stand her ground. Palin hasn’t become some centrist. Nor is she pro-choice.

    Let’s go further into Tommy’s fallacious analysis. Assuming she had no choice, how the hell can be praised? That makes no sense. Sorry. You do not gain moral credit if Tommy’s argument is correct in that she was “forced” to do it. By way of analogy, if someone forced Rush Limbaugh to to give to the poor — the key word being “forced” — do we praise Rush? Hell no. Why? He was forced.

    Likewise, assuming arguendo Palin was “forced” to appoint a pro-choice judge, it is “highly illogical” to give her any sort of points morally.

    In the end, it is what it is. But, don’t give her any praise if she was “forced” to do something. Additionally, she wasn’t forced to squat. She made a political calculation. And, a disingenuous one. I would have respected her more if she rejected the nominee, it went back to committee, and she lost there. Also, she could have gone to court and challenged matters. There were other options.

    Respectfully, I dissent.

    Cube2:00PMMar 17th 2009

  6. Tommy, I am laughing. Each successive comment seems to show up right above the “you d***bag” comment you posted.

    So each guest is getting the Fawlty Towers treatment.

    Am GOING off to laugh now! :>)

  7. Hi Caleb! Watcha DOING? When are you GOING to come in,

    (see below)

  8. Bob, lol is what I’m DOING!


  9. I can see Boeing from my house…..


    I always thought their name sounded like boing boing boing…

  10. Happy Saint Patricks Day Lads and Lassies…

    may the luck of da Irish shine down apon ye today and everyday after

    Erin GO Bragh!!!!

  11. Brian…..clever tie-in with the video. It even evoked Cube’s pet topic of bestiality/”animal love.” In addition, I also have to respectfully dissent with TC and concur with Cube with regard to his OFF TOPIC comment. BTW – Latin has the same effect on me and….nice touch with the use of “pyrrhic”.

  12. Now, I’M going to be OFF-TOPIC. Yes, Michelle, as I said on Facebook earlier today:

    Happy St. Patty’s Day (my patron saint) OR La Fheile Padraig Sona Duit!
    Cead Mille Failte and
    Erin go Bragh!

    Missed the parade in NYC, but will make it a point to enjoy some corned beef and cabbage washed down with a Harp lager.

  13. I lassie….

    have one for me, ladyD

  14. I feel the urge to have Tommy greet me again. :>)

    …see below


  16. OK, I’ll be presumptuous enough to say this on behalf of Bob, Michelle and I:

    EFF YOU! 😉

  17. The topic wasn’t here when I wrote it. Ok. Is that avatar you paying homage to sexual asphyxiation?

  18. And… ha ha Diana agrees with me. Thus, I am right.

Comments RSS TrackBack Identifier URI

Leave a Reply

Please log in using one of these methods to post your comment:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s