|Knuckles - 2011-10-18 |
"My Question: Why should government legally recognize non-procreative private relationships apart from contract law?"
Looks like his real question was "Uh... I guess what, uh, I'm asking... uh... what is... uh... I guess... I don't see... uh..."
|baleen - 2011-10-18 |
The old golf player-indian defense! Checkmate!
|Rovin - 2011-10-18 |
QUAKING in her boots!
|Corpus Delectable - 2011-10-18 |
It's an interesting new right-wing tactic: be so incredibly stupid that your opponents squirm with discomfort in wondering how you survived this long with all those unattended electrical sockets out there, then point out to everyone else that your opponents are "SQUIRMING DID YOU SEE THAT?! SQUIRMING!"
Or maybe it's an old tactic that I'm just now noticing.
See: Ron Paul defending the gold standard, thinking he's scored a checkmate with the question "Why was our currency based on gold? Why not diamonds?"
Not new...Palin was good at that and some of the Fox morons have it down to a science. Sticking with your conviction is much more valuable than accepting reality.
"Tonight's dinner is tacos. Yup, that's what we're eating. Tacos."
"This plate right in front of me is spaghetti. See? Look at it...noodles, marinara sauce, spaghetti."
"I was right! Its tacos!"
"Uhh, I am a chef, I worked in restaurants that served spaghetti. I am completely positive that this is spaghetti. Its an indisputable, immutable fact.
"ITS TACOS, HITLER!"
|Rovin - 2011-10-18 |
Of course, this COULD be one of the most awkward pickup artist videos ever recorded....
|The Mothership - 2011-10-18 |
Look at her running away from my tough questioning to go to her other job! Look at the excuses she makes!
|memedumpster - 2011-10-18 |
"Please Machine Give Talking Point Thank You" will be the title of his hard hitting expose on liberal politics.
|Abstract Fainter - 2011-10-18 |
This wont affect bowler/bowler marriages, will it?
|Mother_Puncher - 2011-10-18 |
And republicans think we are spending too much on education
|Binro the Heretic - 2011-10-18 |
"I love you very much."
"I love you, too, sweetheart."
"And I would love to marry you..."
"But...but we've been golfing together for years!"
|joelkazoo - 2011-10-18 |
It's called sarcasm. Learn to detect it.
|mashedtater - 2011-10-18 |
is he one armed? was he waking off to her chest? why such shoddy and low angled camera work? is he really sonny bono short?
Binro the Heretic
I think he was attempting a hidden camera sort of ambush?
|Prickly Pete - 2011-10-19 |
Do you ever see that even in heterosexual culture? A guy has such a great time golfing with a woman that they agree to get married without being in love?
|TeenerTot - 2011-10-19 |
What is going on? I couldn't even follow his argument, assuming he was making an argument.
Does anyone understand what's going on here?
Basically he's trying to say that there should be a way to "prove the legitimacy" of a relationship between two people, by which I guess he means some way to prove there's actually true love between them or some shit, and that if we don't have such proof, what's to stop any two people, regardless how unloving the relationship, from getting married, based on things as simple as being golf partners?
So the lawyer gives a snide, cynical as hell remark pointing out why this is a stupid fucking arguement, and sarcastically says "If that's the case, then yes, we should allow golf partners to marry" and then this guy who apparently doesn't know when he's being outright insulted and getting TOLD to his face says "OHHHHHHH SEE THIS LAWYER SAYS WE SHOULD LET GOLF PARTNERS MARRY! HOW CRAZY IS THAT! HAH, CASE IN POINT, I'VE PROVEN YET AGAIN HOW LOONY AND SHOCKING THE LEFT TRULY IS!" etc.
tl;dr, a fucking idiot got told why he was an idiot, and is such an idiot he's oblivious and thinks he made some sort of intellectual checkmate.
| Register or login To Post a Comment|