uncle milt wrote:

Monkeyboy wrote:So we had a student from North Korea (that was the rumored country) that was supposed to be the son of some big politician. Nobody knew which kid it was or which politician because it was supposed to be on the hush-hush for safety purposes. I had a Korean student in my class. He left about a month after the regime change there, and he looked amazingly like the new leader pictured above. Seriously, I think it was his kid.

was he wearing an il shirt?

Monkeyboy wrote:

uncle milt wrote:

Monkeyboy wrote:So we had a student from North Korea (that was the rumored country) that was supposed to be the son of some big politician. Nobody knew which kid it was or which politician because it was supposed to be on the hush-hush for safety purposes. I had a Korean student in my class. He left about a month after the regime change there, and he looked amazingly like the new leader pictured above. Seriously, I think it was his kid.

was he wearing an il shirt?

No, but I should have gotten him one, just to see if his reaction gave it away.

OK, one other kid story that's pretty funny, imho. As it turns out, I had two other students who are the sons of major leaders in their countries. But we aren't told who they are. It's usually not a secret though, so you tend to find out after a while. I had one of the kids in class one day and he kept getting on his cell phone. I finally came over and took it from him and told him he could have it after class. He came over after class and just took it off my desk. I told him to hold on a second and took the phone back until I could talk to him about it. He's going on and on about how he had to get on the phone in class because his dad called. I explained that it didn't matter who called, he couldn't take a call in class, etc. While I'm holding the phone, it rings and I look down to see the phone and it says "The King" is calling. He starts freaking out because I wouldn't give him the phone to answer it. He said his dad would kill him ,etc. I stick to my guns and it finally stops ringing and I take a few minutes to explain why I can't have him taking calls in class. Walking home, I was kinda chuckling that he refers to his dad as "The King" on his phone. I was figuring his dad is just overbearing and the kid just gave him that name on his contact list. Nope, the kid's dad is really the king of a rather prominent country. I had no idea. I was holding the phone and refusing to allow some king's kid to answer his dad. It was literally the king calling, and I don't mean Elvis. Whoops.

Rush Limbaugh wrote:What does it say about the college co-ed Susan Fluke, who goes before a congressional committee and essentially says that she must be paid to have sex? What does that make her? It makes her a slut, right? It makes her a prostitute. She wants to be paid to have sex. She's having so much sex, she can't afford the contraception. She wants you and me and the taxpayers to pay her to have sex. What does that make us? We're the pimps. The johns. That's right. We would be the johns. No! ... Pimp's not the right word. Okay, so she's not a slut. She's round-heeled. I take it back.

VoxOrion wrote:I know you're all dying to hear what I think ROFL.

Santorum: A disingenuous goof-ball with sweaty palms and a sweatier smile. A career opportunist and loser. My dislike for Santorum as a Presidential candidate is immeasurable.
Gingrich: We shouldn't even acknowledge this guy.
Paul: Stay crazy, you truther maniac.
Romney: Electable. I think his Mormonishness is the elephant in the living room, particularly in southern states. I was meh about him in 2008 (though I preferred him to McCain) but I downright support him this time around. Figures the "establishment" hates him right when I start liking him. I think Romney'd make a decent to good president, and I think it's doubtful that he would be the embarrassment that W was to either the "conservative cause" (whatever that is) or America, though I really resent the idea of a president called "Mitt".

VoxOrion wrote:I really resent the idea of a president called "Mitt".

jerseyhoya wrote:I wish Vox posted and deleted inflammatory stuff in the politics thread like he used to

PublicPolicyPolling ‏
Washington toplines: Romney 37, Santorum 32, Paul 16, Gingrich 13. Will have full poll up in next 30 minutes or so

slugsrbad wrote:And now the kid is dead

jerseyhoya wrote:

PublicPolicyPolling ‏
Washington toplines: Romney 37, Santorum 32, Paul 16, Gingrich 13. Will have full poll up in next 30 minutes or so

Legitimately surprising if this is accurate. Santorum was up 11 in the PPP poll released on 2/21. The Washington Caucus has been a place where some SoCon candidates have had success. Pat Robertson beat George Bush in 1988. And Romney finished third in 2008 so this isn't a simple Mormon thing.

TenuredVulture wrote:Has anyone else noted a sort of defeatism among many Republicans--George Will, some of the people on Redstate, and probably elsewhere too. Seems to me it's simply another example of right wing crazy talk. Given everything, I'd say Obama is no more than 50-50 to win in November.

Is this another "blame moderates for the loss" cycle? Or is it just a party that has embraced a sort of weird dark not quite real universe?

The Republican presidential face-off in Ohio is too close to call as former Pennsylvania Sen. Rick Santorum has 35 percent of likely Republican primary voters to former Massachusetts Gov. Mitt Romney's 31 percent, according to a Quinnipiac University poll released today.

This compares to a 36 - 29 percent Santorum lead in a February 27 survey by the independent Quinnipiac University poll, the day before the hotly-contested Michigan primary.

In today's survey, former House Speaker Newt Gingrich has 17 percent, with 12 percent for Texas U.S. Rep. Ron Paul. Among voters who name a candidate, 34 percent say they still might change their mind by Tuesday.

TenuredVulture wrote:Has anyone else noted a sort of defeatism among many Republicans--George Will, some of the people on Redstate, and probably elsewhere too. Seems to me it's simply another example of right wing crazy talk. Given everything, I'd say Obama is no more than 50-50 to win in November.

Is this another "blame moderates for the loss" cycle? Or is it just a party that has embraced a sort of weird dark not quite real universe?

drsmooth wrote:Rush to Georgetown: your women students are sluts & prostitutes

in other news, he apparently believes that the quantity of birth control pills a woman takes is determined by how often she has sex

She’s having so much sex she can’t afford the contraception.

one look at his repulsive carcass explains his ignorance of these matters