Tell that to the millions of people around the world who’ve died from COVID.
Oh wait, you can’t. Because they’re dead.
You’ll more likely win the lottery than the vax kill you.
So what? I’d rather not take the chance. If the anti-vaxxers want to test their supposed invulnerability by French kissing COVID patients, they should find a way to do that without putting everyone else at risk of contracting COVID.
If you really buy into that whole fear of the vaccinations thing you really have no clue about medical science.
Congratulations, you’re talking about American conservatives—a group far more likely than any other in this country to reject science and knowledge in favor of superstition, fear, and anger. That they’ve dug themselves further into that hole is the fault of Old 45, not of Fauci or Pelosi or “The Squad” or any other “leftist” you can think of.
Your one of those autism vax lefties?
No, and I don’t know how you even came to think that when I didn’t even say anything about autism in my post. But for the record, since you’ll bitch about it if I don’t: Vaccines don’t cause autism and Wakefield is a fucking hack.
[Were] you one of the people pointing out they’ll cause more problems then solve
Yes, I was. But if the anti-vax crowd wants to get infected so badly that nothing will convince them otherwise, I say they’re free to test their “COVID-19 isn’t a big deal” assumption at their own convenience. “Fuck around and find out” is basically how science is done, after all.
The childlike adults who refuse to get vaccinated don’t give a fuck about “the numbers”. You could tell them the numbers every day; they wouldn’t care. They care about themselves and the stories they can tell themselves—stories reinforced by a right-wing media bubble.
“I’m not getting vaccinated because they said on the Fox News that we’re gonna have to get new passports just for going to the grocery store!”
“The vaccines were developed using aborted fetuses and that’s a sin against God, so fuck that vaccine bullshit.”
“Marjorie Taylor Greene said wearing masks is the last step before we’re shoved into the ovens by that filthy socialist Nancy Pelosi.”
The whole reason that anti-vax bullshit even became a thing is because one egomanical asshole lied about a link between vaccines and autism. Parents with young not-yet-vaxxed kids saw the study being paraded around and thought, “well I don’t want my kids to catch the autism”. And that’s how we ended up with fucking measles outbreaks in the U.S. for the first time in decades. It’s how we ended up with people “just asking questions” but never looking for the answers, only a story that can comfort them like a parent reading a fairy tale to a child. And it’s why, even though the study has long been debunked for the bullshit that it is, the narrative remains: Cold facts alone don’t beat stories.
You can’t tell any story that will ever convince these pitiful shitheads that they’re wrong. For them, about the only thing that will convince them—and even this isn’t foolproof—is for the tragedy hit so close to home that it makes them question everything. You can easily find stories of people dying of COVID-19 whose previously unvaxxed family members later got the jab because “I never thought it could happen to [dead relative]”. They’re selfish in a way that has been reinforced by their upbringings and their media bubbles.
Right-wing/conservative/Republican leaders have been railing for so long against masks and vaccines and COVID restrictions that any reversal of such positions might look like a betrayal of their beliefs—and their constituents. It’s why Ron DeSantis isn’t going to pass any COVID restrictions even as COVID deaths in Florida rise: He knows doing so could cost him his governorship when he goes up for reëlection. It’s why Lindsay Graham didn’t push more heavily for people to get vaxxed even after he revealed he caught COVID-19: He doesn’t want to get bombarded by hate mail.
The selfish Lost Boys and Girls who refuse to grow up won’t be convinced to grow up by a cold recitation of statistics. The only things that will work on them at this point is a family death or an outright whopper of a story like “you better hurry up and get vaxxed before all the Democrats and the Antifa take ’em all and give ’em to [insert racial slur of your choice]”. The anti–COVID vax crowd doesn’t care about facts; if they did, they would’ve already gotten vaccinated.
…are you seriously trying to say that the vaccine doesn’t kill or that “the left” is “overblowing“ the impact of a highly communicable viral disease that has killed well over a half-million people in the U.S., has killed more than 4 million people nationwide, and has left many millions more with what will likely be long-term (possibly even life-long) health issues
the we’ll never die right
they’re free to test that assumption at their own convenience, as far as I’m concerned
When “protestors” at BLM gatherings that partake in acts of looting, violence, arson, etc… those aren’t BLM supporters. They’re people who put on a shirt.
Anyone can say they’re a “BLM supporter”; the Movement for Black Lives isn’t an organized group like the Oathkeepers are. It doesn’t have a central leadership or group running the show.
And unlike Trump supporters, BLM supporters also support a wide range of politicians and policy ideas, which can change from person to person. Some BLM supporters may support the “defund the police” movement; some may not. Some BLM supporters may support Kamala Harris; some may not. Contrast them with Trump supporters, who—by and large—support the policies of Donald Trump, the politicians who support him, and the candidates to whom he gives his political endorsement.
Don’t act like being a BLM supporter is the same thing as being a Trump supporter. It’s about as true as “Ashley Babbitt was shot only for being white and standing peacefully in the Capitol”.
saying there’s a potential for anti-government anarchists to interject in a pro trump rally gone riot; especially given the people running around with pipe bombs the night before… just not possible right?
It’s possible, sure. But did it happen? The most credible evidence available to us says “no, that didn’t happen”. If you have any actual evidence that credibly contradicts that statement, now is the time to produce it. If you don’t, shut the fuck up and go back to fantasizing about building a skyscraper on top of a graveyard or whatever twisted bullshit gets you property rights fetishists off.
The people who entered the Capitol may not all have had violent intentions. But enough of them did that, in the heat of the moment, Ashley Babbitt being shot by a Capitol Police officer tasked with protecting Congress is both justifiable and understandable.
Put yourself in the shoes of the Capitol Police that day: A group of hundreds-to-thousands of people inspired by the words of the sitting POTUS storm the steps of the Capitol, and in the process, some of them break open windows and storm the premises, with several of those now-rioters (both inside and outside) chanting for the hanging of the Vice President. Would you treat that situation as “an ordinary day”, or would you be on guard to the point where any threat to the safety of Congress seems like it might require the use of force?
we know these anarchists are showing up and being called trump supporters
I haven’t heard of any credible evidence that suggests the insurrection was the plot of any kind of leftist or anarchist group. The only groups I know of that planned to do anything that day were right-wing militas such as the Oathkeepers. They did make plans to attent the rally, and they possibly had plans to go further than merely storming the Capitol.
If you can find fact-based evidence from a credible source that proves the insurrection was a “false flag” operation, feel free to share it. If you can’t show me that kind of evidence, please fuck off with that baseless claim, you gullible asshole.
I’m not happy about Ashley Babbitt dying. I didn’t celebrate her death, as you might want to imply that I did. Hell, I would send my condolences to her family for their loss if I believed that would be worth doing.
That said: Nobody held a gun to her head or otherwise forced her to do any of the things she did that day. She chose to do those things of her own free will. I lack sympathy for her because she alone made the decisions that ultimately led to her death—decisions that she might not have made were it not for the drug that is Trumpism.
Ashley Babbitt didn’t die because she was a white woman. Ashley Babbitt didn’t die because of police brutality—because of an overuse of force, lethal or otherwise, in response to a given situation. Ashley Babbitt died because she willingly made a bunch of bad decisions, the last of which was trying to reach members of Congress during a violent riot. I take no pleasure in any of that, despite what you might think; her death isn’t something to celebrate.
But I do take pleasure in, as you put it, watching the truth implode your worldview. I do so only because it has been a sincere pleasure to see you finally confront facts that don’t validate your worldview, fellate your biases, and make you feel like you’re smarter than everyone else because you have some sort of super-duper-secret info that the rest of us idiots have overlooked.
Having your worldview challenged makes you feel like shit—as well it should. It means you’re being forced to confront your own biases and preconceived notions. You’re being made to justify those biases, to work out whether they’re legitimate or bullshit. That isn’t supposed to make you feel good all the time. It’s supposed to make you feel like shit whenever you get it wrong so you don’t make the same mistake again.
You’ve had your worldview rocked because now you know that your story of Ashley Babbitt—your idea of her being an innocent bystander who was shot by the bloodthirsty Republican-hating Capitol Police for being the wrong race at the wrong time or what-th’fuck-ever you told yourself—is complete bullshit. Don’t complain about that. Instead, ask yourself if your broader narrative of the insurrection is bullshit. Stop trying to equivocate the protests against police brutality that ended up becoming violent (often because of police intervention) and look at the insurrection from the context of Trumpism. Ask yourself this one question: “If I was wrong about her, what else might I be wrong about?”
Being wrong isn’t a bad thing. Hell, admitting you were wrong is a good thing. But being stubborn about your wrongness to the point where you’re complaining about how people proved you wrong even as you admit you were wrong? Well, that just makes you an asshole.
People need to be trained to not try climbing into an area where members of Congress are being protected by armed police during a violent insurrection.
Because that’s why Ashley Babbitt died. She wasn’t shot for “filming” the riot. She wasn’t shot because she was merely standing in a specific area. She was shot because, during a violent riot where hundreds of people stormed the Capitol to disrupt the functions of American democracy, she tried to get past a barricaded entryway that was right in front of where several members of Congress were being kept safe from the riot.
I don’t fault the officer who shot Ashley Babbitt for his reaction. I fault her for making a series of poor decisions that ultimately led to her death.
This wasn't some random town across the country. Its his home town of Wilmington Delaware.
So what? Even if we take that fact into account, it doesn’t explain away all the inconsistencies, improbabilities, and all-around bullshit surrounding the story. And it doesn’t back up any blatantly bullshit assertions such as “Hunter Biden was high on crack when he dropped off his laptop”.
You need to come up with a better (read: plausible) explanation as to why Hunter Biden allegedly dropped off a laptop in his hometown, allegedly left it there for a year, and allegedly kept emails on it that were full of easily debunked information. If you can’t? That’s a problem only you can solve.
Every stereotype about lawyers being ambulance-chasing truth-bending dickheads pales in comparison to a troll like Liebowitz. Even the Prenda Law Players would look at Liebowitz and go “holy shit, this guy is awful”. No judge, no court, no law association of any kind should ever allow him to even crack open a law book, let alone practice law of any kind again.
All of which is to say: AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAH
Yes or no: Do you believe the government should have the legal right to compel any privately owned interactive web service into hosting legally protected speech that the owners/operators of said service don’t want to host?
Getting censored proves that your opinion is the strongest
Shut the fuck up with this, Koby.
The assholes spreading lies about the 2020 election results haven’t been “censored” because they’re all free to go to Parler, Gab, and whatever other shitpits will have them and spread their lies on those platforms. Losing an audience, a platform, and a reach to which you were never entitled in the first place isn’t censorship—especially if it’s the owner/operator of a privately owned service showing you the door.
I get that you’re a communist who wants the government to seize the means of social media production and all that, but that’s not an excuse to lie about moderation being censorship, you dipshit.
This week's political censorship highlight is Twitter banning the Audit War Room.
For what reason should Twitter be forced to host blatant falsehoods about the 2020 election results, Koby?
Getting censored proves that your opinion is the strongest.
And if Twitter could censor somebody, you might have had a point. But they can’t. So you don’t.
And I’ll ask the question again, just to be sure you get the point Mike was trying to make: On average, what kind of “political” content is being deleted from Twitter? Be exhaustively specific.
when the government speaks, it should take reasonable care to speak to all citizens and to do so without preference for any of them
That’s why the government has its own websites. That’s why the government can command the attention of broadcast and cable news networks for press conferences. That’s not a good enough reason to force government speech upon services like Twitter or Mastodon instances—or to force people to read it.
if it speaks to closed groups, like those on Twitter
FYI: Unless it’s a direct (read: private) message, every tweet on Twitter can be read by any member of the general public regardless of whether they have an account. There are no “closed groups” on Twitter outside of direct message conversations. Twitter itself is only “closed” in the sense that people can’t post to Twitter without an account.
On the post: Disentangling Disinformation: Not As Easy As It Looks
Tell that to the millions of people around the world who’ve died from COVID.
Oh wait, you can’t. Because they’re dead.
So what? I’d rather not take the chance. If the anti-vaxxers want to test their supposed invulnerability by French kissing COVID patients, they should find a way to do that without putting everyone else at risk of contracting COVID.
Congratulations, you’re talking about American conservatives—a group far more likely than any other in this country to reject science and knowledge in favor of superstition, fear, and anger. That they’ve dug themselves further into that hole is the fault of Old 45, not of Fauci or Pelosi or “The Squad” or any other “leftist” you can think of.
No, and I don’t know how you even came to think that when I didn’t even say anything about autism in my post. But for the record, since you’ll bitch about it if I don’t: Vaccines don’t cause autism and Wakefield is a fucking hack.
Yes, I was. But if the anti-vax crowd wants to get infected so badly that nothing will convince them otherwise, I say they’re free to test their “COVID-19 isn’t a big deal” assumption at their own convenience. “Fuck around and find out” is basically how science is done, after all.
On the post: Disentangling Disinformation: Not As Easy As It Looks
This is why I use Old 45: It’s not just easier to type out and parse, it’s also accurate in describing his age and his status as a former president.
On the post: Disentangling Disinformation: Not As Easy As It Looks
The childlike adults who refuse to get vaccinated don’t give a fuck about “the numbers”. You could tell them the numbers every day; they wouldn’t care. They care about themselves and the stories they can tell themselves—stories reinforced by a right-wing media bubble.
“I’m not getting vaccinated because they said on the Fox News that we’re gonna have to get new passports just for going to the grocery store!”
“The vaccines were developed using aborted fetuses and that’s a sin against God, so fuck that vaccine bullshit.”
“Marjorie Taylor Greene said wearing masks is the last step before we’re shoved into the ovens by that filthy socialist Nancy Pelosi.”
The whole reason that anti-vax bullshit even became a thing is because one egomanical asshole lied about a link between vaccines and autism. Parents with young not-yet-vaxxed kids saw the study being paraded around and thought, “well I don’t want my kids to catch the autism”. And that’s how we ended up with fucking measles outbreaks in the U.S. for the first time in decades. It’s how we ended up with people “just asking questions” but never looking for the answers, only a story that can comfort them like a parent reading a fairy tale to a child. And it’s why, even though the study has long been debunked for the bullshit that it is, the narrative remains: Cold facts alone don’t beat stories.
You can’t tell any story that will ever convince these pitiful shitheads that they’re wrong. For them, about the only thing that will convince them—and even this isn’t foolproof—is for the tragedy hit so close to home that it makes them question everything. You can easily find stories of people dying of COVID-19 whose previously unvaxxed family members later got the jab because “I never thought it could happen to [dead relative]”. They’re selfish in a way that has been reinforced by their upbringings and their media bubbles.
Right-wing/conservative/Republican leaders have been railing for so long against masks and vaccines and COVID restrictions that any reversal of such positions might look like a betrayal of their beliefs—and their constituents. It’s why Ron DeSantis isn’t going to pass any COVID restrictions even as COVID deaths in Florida rise: He knows doing so could cost him his governorship when he goes up for reëlection. It’s why Lindsay Graham didn’t push more heavily for people to get vaxxed even after he revealed he caught COVID-19: He doesn’t want to get bombarded by hate mail.
The selfish Lost Boys and Girls who refuse to grow up won’t be convinced to grow up by a cold recitation of statistics. The only things that will work on them at this point is a family death or an outright whopper of a story like “you better hurry up and get vaxxed before all the Democrats and the Antifa take ’em all and give ’em to [insert racial slur of your choice]”. The anti–COVID vax crowd doesn’t care about facts; if they did, they would’ve already gotten vaccinated.
On the post: Disentangling Disinformation: Not As Easy As It Looks
…fucking what
…are you seriously trying to say that the vaccine doesn’t kill or that “the left” is “overblowing“ the impact of a highly communicable viral disease that has killed well over a half-million people in the U.S., has killed more than 4 million people nationwide, and has left many millions more with what will likely be long-term (possibly even life-long) health issues
they’re free to test that assumption at their own convenience, as far as I’m concerned
On the post: Judge Ignores First Amendment, Misreads Town Law, While Ordering Resident To Remove 'Fuck Biden' Signs
Anyone can say they’re a “BLM supporter”; the Movement for Black Lives isn’t an organized group like the Oathkeepers are. It doesn’t have a central leadership or group running the show.
And unlike Trump supporters, BLM supporters also support a wide range of politicians and policy ideas, which can change from person to person. Some BLM supporters may support the “defund the police” movement; some may not. Some BLM supporters may support Kamala Harris; some may not. Contrast them with Trump supporters, who—by and large—support the policies of Donald Trump, the politicians who support him, and the candidates to whom he gives his political endorsement.
Don’t act like being a BLM supporter is the same thing as being a Trump supporter. It’s about as true as “Ashley Babbitt was shot only for being white and standing peacefully in the Capitol”.
It’s possible, sure. But did it happen? The most credible evidence available to us says “no, that didn’t happen”. If you have any actual evidence that credibly contradicts that statement, now is the time to produce it. If you don’t, shut the fuck up and go back to fantasizing about building a skyscraper on top of a graveyard or whatever twisted bullshit gets you property rights fetishists off.
On the post: Last Month In An LA Court I Witnessed The Future Of A World Without Section 230; It Was A Mess
shut up, Meg
On the post: Judge Ignores First Amendment, Misreads Town Law, While Ordering Resident To Remove 'Fuck Biden' Signs
The people who entered the Capitol may not all have had violent intentions. But enough of them did that, in the heat of the moment, Ashley Babbitt being shot by a Capitol Police officer tasked with protecting Congress is both justifiable and understandable.
Put yourself in the shoes of the Capitol Police that day: A group of hundreds-to-thousands of people inspired by the words of the sitting POTUS storm the steps of the Capitol, and in the process, some of them break open windows and storm the premises, with several of those now-rioters (both inside and outside) chanting for the hanging of the Vice President. Would you treat that situation as “an ordinary day”, or would you be on guard to the point where any threat to the safety of Congress seems like it might require the use of force?
I haven’t heard of any credible evidence that suggests the insurrection was the plot of any kind of leftist or anarchist group. The only groups I know of that planned to do anything that day were right-wing militas such as the Oathkeepers. They did make plans to attent the rally, and they possibly had plans to go further than merely storming the Capitol.
If you can find fact-based evidence from a credible source that proves the insurrection was a “false flag” operation, feel free to share it. If you can’t show me that kind of evidence, please fuck off with that baseless claim, you gullible asshole.
On the post: Judge Ignores First Amendment, Misreads Town Law, While Ordering Resident To Remove 'Fuck Biden' Signs
I’m not happy about Ashley Babbitt dying. I didn’t celebrate her death, as you might want to imply that I did. Hell, I would send my condolences to her family for their loss if I believed that would be worth doing.
That said: Nobody held a gun to her head or otherwise forced her to do any of the things she did that day. She chose to do those things of her own free will. I lack sympathy for her because she alone made the decisions that ultimately led to her death—decisions that she might not have made were it not for the drug that is Trumpism.
Ashley Babbitt didn’t die because she was a white woman. Ashley Babbitt didn’t die because of police brutality—because of an overuse of force, lethal or otherwise, in response to a given situation. Ashley Babbitt died because she willingly made a bunch of bad decisions, the last of which was trying to reach members of Congress during a violent riot. I take no pleasure in any of that, despite what you might think; her death isn’t something to celebrate.
But I do take pleasure in, as you put it, watching the truth implode your worldview. I do so only because it has been a sincere pleasure to see you finally confront facts that don’t validate your worldview, fellate your biases, and make you feel like you’re smarter than everyone else because you have some sort of super-duper-secret info that the rest of us idiots have overlooked.
Having your worldview challenged makes you feel like shit—as well it should. It means you’re being forced to confront your own biases and preconceived notions. You’re being made to justify those biases, to work out whether they’re legitimate or bullshit. That isn’t supposed to make you feel good all the time. It’s supposed to make you feel like shit whenever you get it wrong so you don’t make the same mistake again.
You’ve had your worldview rocked because now you know that your story of Ashley Babbitt—your idea of her being an innocent bystander who was shot by the bloodthirsty Republican-hating Capitol Police for being the wrong race at the wrong time or what-th’fuck-ever you told yourself—is complete bullshit. Don’t complain about that. Instead, ask yourself if your broader narrative of the insurrection is bullshit. Stop trying to equivocate the protests against police brutality that ended up becoming violent (often because of police intervention) and look at the insurrection from the context of Trumpism. Ask yourself this one question: “If I was wrong about her, what else might I be wrong about?”
Being wrong isn’t a bad thing. Hell, admitting you were wrong is a good thing. But being stubborn about your wrongness to the point where you’re complaining about how people proved you wrong even as you admit you were wrong? Well, that just makes you an asshole.
On the post: Judge Ignores First Amendment, Misreads Town Law, While Ordering Resident To Remove 'Fuck Biden' Signs
People need to be trained to not try climbing into an area where members of Congress are being protected by armed police during a violent insurrection.
Because that’s why Ashley Babbitt died. She wasn’t shot for “filming” the riot. She wasn’t shot because she was merely standing in a specific area. She was shot because, during a violent riot where hundreds of people stormed the Capitol to disrupt the functions of American democracy, she tried to get past a barricaded entryway that was right in front of where several members of Congress were being kept safe from the riot.
I don’t fault the officer who shot Ashley Babbitt for his reaction. I fault her for making a series of poor decisions that ultimately led to her death.
On the post: Judge Ignores First Amendment, Misreads Town Law, While Ordering Resident To Remove 'Fuck Biden' Signs
So what? Even if we take that fact into account, it doesn’t explain away all the inconsistencies, improbabilities, and all-around bullshit surrounding the story. And it doesn’t back up any blatantly bullshit assertions such as “Hunter Biden was high on crack when he dropped off his laptop”.
You need to come up with a better (read: plausible) explanation as to why Hunter Biden allegedly dropped off a laptop in his hometown, allegedly left it there for a year, and allegedly kept emails on it that were full of easily debunked information. If you can’t? That’s a problem only you can solve.
On the post: Copyright Troll Richard Liebowitz Keeps On Losing In Court
Every stereotype about lawyers being ambulance-chasing truth-bending dickheads pales in comparison to a troll like Liebowitz. Even the Prenda Law Players would look at Liebowitz and go “holy shit, this guy is awful”. No judge, no court, no law association of any kind should ever allow him to even crack open a law book, let alone practice law of any kind again.
All of which is to say: AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAH
On the post: Last Month In An LA Court I Witnessed The Future Of A World Without Section 230; It Was A Mess
Yes or no: Do you believe the government should have the legal right to compel any privately owned interactive web service into hosting legally protected speech that the owners/operators of said service don’t want to host?
On the post: House Republicans Introduce Ridiculous, Contradictory, Unconstitutional Package Of 32 Bills About Section 230 And Content Moderation
Also known as the “I have been silenced” fallacy.
On the post: Last Month In An LA Court I Witnessed The Future Of A World Without Section 230; It Was A Mess
Shut the fuck up with this, Koby.
The assholes spreading lies about the 2020 election results haven’t been “censored” because they’re all free to go to Parler, Gab, and whatever other shitpits will have them and spread their lies on those platforms. Losing an audience, a platform, and a reach to which you were never entitled in the first place isn’t censorship—especially if it’s the owner/operator of a privately owned service showing you the door.
I get that you’re a communist who wants the government to seize the means of social media production and all that, but that’s not an excuse to lie about moderation being censorship, you dipshit.
On the post: Last Month In An LA Court I Witnessed The Future Of A World Without Section 230; It Was A Mess
For what reason should Twitter be forced to host blatant falsehoods about the 2020 election results, Koby?
And if Twitter could censor somebody, you might have had a point. But they can’t. So you don’t.
And I’ll ask the question again, just to be sure you get the point Mike was trying to make: On average, what kind of “political” content is being deleted from Twitter? Be exhaustively specific.
On the post: Enough About FOSTA's 'Unintended Consequences'; They Were Always Intended
Watching the MST3K version is fine.
Watching the original is voluntary brain damage.
On the post: Exec That Tried To Send Critical Reporters A Dead Pig Blames 'The Drinking Culture At eBay'
To some people, accuracy is criticism.
On the post: Enough About FOSTA's 'Unintended Consequences'; They Were Always Intended
“Because lawyers” is a good enough reason. No one wants to deal with mountains of lawsuits.
On the post: Senator Klobuchar Proposes An Unconstitutional Law That Would Kill Legions Of People If Trump Were Still President
That’s why the government has its own websites. That’s why the government can command the attention of broadcast and cable news networks for press conferences. That’s not a good enough reason to force government speech upon services like Twitter or Mastodon instances—or to force people to read it.
FYI: Unless it’s a direct (read: private) message, every tweet on Twitter can be read by any member of the general public regardless of whether they have an account. There are no “closed groups” on Twitter outside of direct message conversations. Twitter itself is only “closed” in the sense that people can’t post to Twitter without an account.
On the post: Exec That Tried To Send Critical Reporters A Dead Pig Blames 'The Drinking Culture At eBay'
This is why we need to stop feeding them Fritos, Tab, and Mountain Dew.
Next >>