Why is FNC on top again?
Is it because most Americans are right wing idiots?




May Ratings: FNC Stays On Top
For the 77th consecutive month, FNC finished first in total day and prime time ratings during May. FNC was the sixth highest rated cable network on all of basic cable during prime time for the month (CNN and MSNBC finished 19th and 26th) and the seventh rated network in total day (CNN and MSNBC were 19th and 27th).

FNC also had 11 out of the top 13 programs in cable during the month in Total Viewers. The O'Reilly Factor was the #1 program in cable news for the 90th consecutive month, and saw gains in Total Viewers year-to-year (26%).

Amercia's Newsroom (9-11amET) was up 30% year-to-year, with the program averaging more viewers than CNN and MSNBC combined during the time period.

Meanwhile, On the Record with Greta Van Susteren has been #1 for 73 consecutive months in Total Viewers while Hannity & Colmes has been #1 in its timeslot for 54 consecutive months.

http://www.mediabistro.com/tvnewser/ratings/may_ratings_fnc_stays_on_top_85816.asp

Why is FNC on top again?
Is it because most Americans are right wing idiots?

That's certainly one plausible explanation.

That's certainly one plausible explanation.
or the left is split by CNN and MSNBC?

Isn't Glenn Beck on CNN during prime time? Why would the lefties be split?

Isn't Glenn Beck on CNN during prime time? Why would the lefties be split?
Glenn is on Headline news, and 7 eastern isn't prime time

Why is FNC on top again?
Is it because most Americans are right wing idiots?

Yes. Precisely.

or the left is split by CNN and MSNBC?

Annnnnnd Mikezilla wins the thread easily.

Isn't Glenn Beck on CNN during prime time? Why would the lefties be split?

Exactly right. Why would lefties watch a channel that gives Glenn Beck his own show?

Exactly right. Why would lefties watch Glenn Beck?
Why would anyone for that matter.

or the left is split by CNN and MSNBC?

?!?!!?!?!!

I cannot imagine anyone from the left watching CNN or MSNBC and thinking --"Yeah! They're speaking my language. They're telling it like it is!"

Both of them are such ceaseless cheerleaders for the status quo that it's sickening. (not that that makes them any different than any other mainstream "news" outlet.

CNN and MSNBC are for the most part owned by defense industry corporations and defense contractors. MSNBC is owned by General Electric......who donated 1.1 million to George W. Bush’s campaign. CBS is owned by Westinghouse whose number one board member is Frank Carlucci, the president of the Carlyle Group. CNN is owned by Time Warner who donated 1.6 million to George Bush’s 2000 campaign. All of major media in this country is owned and controlled by huge Corporations with a vested interest --to put it mildly-- in seeing this country deeply involved in the foreign wars and conflicts from which they reap billions in profits.....and none of them are "liberals".

And Rupert Murdoch hosted one of Hillary's biggest fundraisers to date.

What's your point?

And Rupert Murdoch hosted one of Hillary's biggest fundraisers to date.

What's your point?

Simply put;

that the monied elite, who own and control the main sources of the dissemination of information to the masses, are the true power behind the throne. They own the politicians from both wings of the Corporate Party, the only political Party that this country has.

These men control, like puppets on a string, these people who they pay to have elected, and who make the laws in Washington. And they thus control the masses, without the masses even being aware of it. They control the way that the herd thinks, and moves.

And Rupert Murdoch hosted one of Hillary's biggest fundraisers to date.

What's your point?
That actually supports his point more, as I'm sure FT would call Hillary one of the worst of the Corporatists....

Why is FNC on top again?
I don't know, but I will tell you that commercial success does not imply quality. Otherwise, Michael Jackson would be on par with Mozart.

I don't know, but I will tell you that commercial success does not imply quality. Otherwise, Michael Jackson would be on par with Mozart.
Mozart was the 1st rock star:cool:

Mozart was the 1st rock star

Rock me Amadeus!!

:cool:

Rock me Amadeus!!

:cool:
Mozart was the first, was Falco (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gpWwxAfNrxI) Austria's last?

That actually supports his point more, as I'm sure FT would call Hillary one of the worst of the Corporatists....
idk-Obama's running close on that one. he leads the pack far & away with donations from oil company execs & employees. his claim that he takes no money from oil companies was a fantastic attempt at subterfuge.

....... I'm sure FT would call Hillary one of the worst of the Corporatists....

idk-Obama's running close on that one.

Absolutely correct.

All three of the leading candidates have already been paid for. They are --like virtually all of the presidents who preceded them-- in complete thrall to the powers behind the throne.

I don't know, but I will tell you that commercial success does not imply quality. Otherwise, Michael Jackson would be on par with Mozart.
LOL - how true. :)

Absolutely correct.

All three of the leading candidates have already been paid for. They are --like virtually all of the presidents who preceded them-- in complete thrall to the powers behind the throne.
have you forgotten who owns the oil companies? pension plans and small private investors.

idk-Obama's running close on that one. he leads the pack far & away with donations from oil company execs & employees. his claim that he takes no money from oil companies was a fantastic attempt at subterfuge.
That is not true. John McCain far and away leads the pack with donations from oil company employees. (http://www.opensecrets.org/pres08/select.php?ind=E01)

John McCain - $723,777
Rudy Guliani - $634,558
Mitt Romney - $457,244
Hillary Clinton - $371,678
Barack Obama - $304,399

That is not true. John McCain far and away leads the pack with donations from oil company employees. (http://www.opensecrets.org/pres08/select.php?ind=E01)

John McCain - $723,777
Rudy Guliani - $634,558
Mitt Romney - $457,244
Hillary Clinton - $371,678
Barack Obama - $304,399
that's among folks giving more than $200
METHODOLOGY: The totals on these charts are calculated from PAC contributions and contributions from individuals giving more than $200, as reported to the Federal Election Commission. Individual contributions are generally categorized based on the donor's occupation/employer, although individuals may be classified instead as ideological donors if they've given more than $200 to an ideological PAC.

most of his donations are still under the methodology for that graph.

2008 boosted Obama into the position of the most successful fundraiser, as he continues to pull ahead of Hillary Clinton in the money race every month. He seems to be having no problem appealing to new donors, either. In 2008 he's been raising more than $1 million a day, largely thanks to small online donors. Despite Obama's fundraising success, the two Democrats remain in a tight race for both superdelegates and delegates.

that's among folks giving more than $200


most of his donations are still under the methodology for that graph.

Can you find any data for people who gave less than $200?

Can you find any data for people who gave less than $200?
i'm working on it. i've got 6 things going on at once here.

have you forgotten who owns the oil companies? pension plans and small private investors.
Everyone forgets this.
More oil money goes to firemen, nurses, etc. than to oil executives.

So the class warfare aspect of going after the oil companies hurts the middle class more than the CEO's.

But they are a big, easy, envied target.

Everyone forgets this.
More oil money goes to firemen, nurses, etc. than to oil executives.

So the class warfare aspect of going after the oil companies hurts the middle class more than the CEO's.

But they are a big, easy, envied target.
that's why my money ran off to Shell when comrade Maxine started ranting about nationalizing oil companies.

that's why my money ran off to Shell when comrade Maxine started ranting about nationalizing oil companies.

What do you think about one national oil company that would pressure the oil cartel to compete more fairly in the market?

What do you think about one national oil company that would pressure the oil cartel to compete more fairly in the market?
even if they could, most of our imported oil comes from Canada & Mexico, and that one monster would still have to buy it at world market prices...with all the efficiency of inner-city schools:@@:

even if they could, most of our imported oil comes from Canada & Mexico, and that one monster would still have to buy it at world market prices...with all the efficiency of inner-city schools:@@:

Why not the efficiency of rich suburban public schools?

That one company would also not have executive salaries and shareholder dividends to pay so they would serve as a benchmark to judge whether all the other oil companies are engaging in price gouging.

So the class warfare aspect of going after the oil companies hurts the middle class more than the CEO's.




We have a couple of Class Warfare Warriors here at AF.

Why not the efficiency of rich suburban public schools?

That one company would also not have executive salaries and shareholder dividends to pay so they would serve as a benchmark to judge whether all the other oil companies are engaging in price gouging.
parental involvement? even then, the districts still have a hard time keeping the roof fixed. how about Amtrak? there's another shining example of what happens then Government takes over-the 1st thing out the window is the regulations.

That one company would also not have executive salaries and shareholder dividends to pay .....
Not at first.
You wouldn't be able to judge the comparison fairly until the (new) nationalized company had to pay retirement benefits, pensions, equipment repairs, depreciation, etc.
These are all expenses that older companies have.

And although nationalized companies may not have CEO salaries to pay out, private sector companies don't spew out no show jobs to brothers-in-law, cousins and political cronies at nearly the same.

... private sector companies don't spew out no show jobs to brothers-in-law, cousins and political cronies at nearly the same.
B.S. They certainly do. Especially at the top. There is a revolving door between the Republicans in government and private enterprise.

how about Amtrak?

I love Amtrak!
Whats your problem with it?

What do you think about one national oil company that would pressure the oil cartel to compete more fairly in the market?

I don't think Pemex is widely regarded as a model of efficient operation. Regardless, I don't see how one company has any more leverage than 10 companies buying the same amount of oil. Is OPEC more likely to listen to one company asking for more production and/or lower prices than they would be to listen to ten companies?

I don't think Pemex is widely regarded as a model of efficient operation.

The entire Mexican government is corrupt.

I love Amtrak!
Whats your problem with it?
besides it's never broken even (http://www.csmonitor.com/2007/1109/p08s01-comv.html)-not even with being a monopoly with massive subsides:slap:

there's another shining example of what happens then Government takes over-the 1st thing out the window is the regulations.

That doesn't make any sense.
Who is going to enforce regulations except the government?

besides it's never broken even (http://www.csmonitor.com/2007/1109/p08s01-comv.html)-not even with being a monopoly with massive subsides

So what? It's cheap.

So what? It's cheap.
for direct out of pocket cost...for those that use it. for the vast majority of us that never use it, it's a multi-billion dollar boondoggle.

for direct out of pocket cost...for those that use it. for the vast majority of us that never use it, it's a multi-billion dollar boondoggle.
If you don't choose to use it, that is up to you. Just because you choose not to use it doesn't make it a boondoggle.

besides it's never broken even (http://www.csmonitor.com/2007/1109/p08s01-comv.html)-not even with being a monopoly with massive subsides:slap:
Oh come on, you're nit-picking.

If you don't choose to use it, that is up to you. Just because you choose not to use it doesn't make it a boondoggle.

You seem to be under the assumption that Amtrak is even available to use for most people. It doesn't pass through my town. In Cincinnati it passes through two or three times a week somewhere between 3 and 4 in the morning. Amtrak is great in the places where there's a decent enough population density and short enough distances to make it worthwhile, like the Eastern corridor, but it doesn't make a lot of sense in a lot of other places.

If you don't choose to use it, that is up to you. Just because you choose not to use it doesn't make it a boondoggle.
why would i? when i have to travel, i don't have a week to get there. even if it was to go to Chicago, i'd still have to rent a car when i got there, or spend more in cab fare then i would have spent on gas driving there. my leg has healed just enough to disquailfy me for a handicap parking permit.

Oh come on, you're nit-picking.
you have to nit-pick when you're dealing with louses.:thumbs:

You seem to be under the assumption that Amtrak is even available to use for most people. It doesn't pass through my town. In Cincinnati it passes through two or three times a week somewhere between 3 and 4 in the morning. Amtrak is great in the places where there's a decent enough population density and short enough distances to make it worthwhile, like the Eastern corridor, but it doesn't make a lot of sense in a lot of other places.
good point-i'd have to drive to Flint and leave my car parked in a neighborhood most sane ppl wouldn't stop on yellow in.

Oh come on, you're nit-picking.
Exactly. :rolleyes:

You seem to be under the assumption that Amtrak is even available to use for most people. It doesn't pass through my town. In Cincinnati it passes through two or three times a week somewhere between 3 and 4 in the morning. Amtrak is great in the places where there's a decent enough population density and short enough distances to make it worthwhile, like the Eastern corridor, but it doesn't make a lot of sense in a lot of other places.

So lobby to have it expanded.

Where it does run, it is great!
Its cheap and on time.

why would i? when i have to travel, i don't have a week to get there. even if it was to go to Chicago, i'd still have to rent a car when i got there, or spend more in cab fare then i would have spent on gas driving there. my leg has healed just enough to disquailfy me for a handicap parking permit.
no offense, but I don't care about why you choose not to use it, the point is that it is there for you to use if you choose. Just because you choose not to use it, doesn't mean its a boondoggle. It works very well for those who do choose to use it and with today's gas prices, it is becoming more popular than it has been in a long time.

P.S. I am glad to hear your leg is getting better.

no offense, but I don't care about why you choose not to use it, the point is that it is there for you to use if you choose. Just because you choose not to use it, doesn't mean its a boondoggle. It works very well for those who do choose to use it and with today's gas prices, it is becoming more popular than it has been in a long time.

P.S. I am glad to hear your leg is getting better.
thanks.

still, the overwheleming majority of Americans don't use it, will never use it, and will never even seriously consider it for the same reasons. commerical passenger rail service went belly up for a reason.

good point-i'd have to drive to Flint and leave my car parked in a neighborhood most sane ppl wouldn't stop on yellow in.

Where do you live?

Here is a list of the amtrak stations in Michigan. There might be something closer.

MI
Albion, MI ALI
Ann Arbor, MI ARB
Bangor, MI BAM
Battle Creek, MI BTL
Big Rapids, MI BGP
Birmingham, MI BMM
Boyne City, MI BYC
Boyne Falls, MI BYF
Cadillac, MI CLC
Dearborn, MI DER
Detroit, MI DET
Dowagiac, MI DOA
Durand, MI DRD
East Lansing, MI LNS
Escanaba - Bus Stop, MI EMI
Flint, MI FLN
Grand Rapids, MI GRR
Greenfield Village, MI GFV
Holland, MI HOM
Houghton - Bus Stop, MI HGH
Howard City, MI HWC
Jackson, MI JXN
Kalamazoo, MI KAL
Kalkaska, MI KLK
Kingsley - Bus Station, MI KGS
L'Anse - Bus Stop, MI LAN
Lapeer, MI LPE
Mackinaw City, MI MAK
Mancelona, MI MLN
Manton - Bus Station, MI MTO
Marquette - Bus Stop, MI MQT
New Buffalo, MI NBM
Niles, MI NLS
Pellston, MI PST
Petoskey, MI PSK
Pontiac, MI PNT
Port Huron, MI PTH
Powers - Bus Stop, MI PWR
Reed City, MI REE
Rockford, MI RKF
Royal Oak, MI ROY
St. Ignace, MI STI
St. Joseph, MI SJM
Stephenson - Bus Stop, MI SPN
Traverse City, MI TRV
Walloon Lake, MI WNK

So lobby to have it expanded.
Good plan. :rolleyes:

thanks.

still, the overwheleming majority of Americans don't use it, will never use it, and will never even seriously consider it for the same reasons. commerical passenger rail service went belly up for a reason.
I disagree. Commercial passenger rail service does very well in other parts of the world, where gas prices have been higher than in the states for a long time. Western Europe and Japan have excellent rail services with some really fantastic high speed trains.

With Gas prices what they are, and rising, the push is for more rail service not less. Like Lionel said, it isn't available in his area. That is going to be the major demand in the coming years because of the high gas prices, to make it available to more people. Smart business people will see that demand and rush to fill it.

I disagree. Commercial passenger rail service does very well in other parts of the world, where gas prices have been higher than in the states for a long time. Western Europe and Japan have excellent rail services with some really fantastic high speed trains.

we don't live in other parts of the world. commerical rail service works in Japan because they're more densely populated. 127 million ppl, on a land mass about the size of CA, that's 75% mountainous forest.

With Gas prices what they are, and rising, the push is for more rail service not less. Like Lionel said, it isn't available in his area. That is going to be the major demand in the coming years because of the high gas prices, to make it available to more people. Smart business people will see that demand and rush to fill it.
gas is cheap, we just want it cheaper. ok, we're spoiled.

So lobby to have it expanded.

Where it does run, it is great!
Its cheap and on time.

But I don't need it - I have highways and I live 9 minutes away from an airport. And I wouldn't call it cheap. Competitive, perhaps, but it's not like it's available at cut-rate prices. And on time - in the Eastern Corridor, yes. Everywhere else - it's horribly off schedule. Mind you, that has more to do with the hosting freight railroads than Amtrak, but still . . .

I disagree. Commercial passenger rail service does very well in other parts of the world, where gas prices have been higher than in the states for a long time. Western Europe and Japan have excellent rail services with some really fantastic high speed trains.

They have higher population densities in much smaller areas (as was pointed out above). Which is why it's so popular and works to well on the east coast. Taking Amtrak between, say Chicago and Charlotte, wouldn't make sense because a plane would beat even high speed rail. We just have much larger distances to cover in this country.

Plus those countries all have a separate rail system for passenger trains, whereas Amtrak has to run over the rails of various freight railroads that aren't especially thrilled at having to put their high priority, very profitable freight trains on a siding to wait for Amtrak to slide by (except, again, on the east coast, where Amtrak for the most part runs over it's own rails). We would need a separate rail system, the cost of which would be so immense as to make it pretty much impossible.

I like the train. I would much rather ride the train than fly.

Really? Why? :confused: Are you afraid of flying?

I use Amtrak rail lines every day, leased by NJ Transit. Amtrak is a mess. Trains are broken down and late. It's horribly underfunded. The Northeast Corridor would run at a profit, but all the little lines out to Hooterville cause it to lose money. Many of these money-losing routes are actually pushed through by politicians in Washington. (http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_m1215/is_11_200/ai_57843222)

In the rest of the Free World, train service, as well as most public transport, is more subsidized, and runs better. Of course the size of the US must be taken into account. But subsidizing public transport is not all that bad an investment when you consider all the hidden costs of driving cars. Like fighting a $2 trillion war in order to guarantee your oil supplies. And the medical costs associated with all the smog and pollution. And the global warming. In fact, when all the costs are analyzed, public transport is a downright bargain. NYC subway is 100 years old and helps to make NYC the most energy efficient city in America. Of course many in the current Congress still considers public transit the same thing as socialism. So it's time to vote those clowns out...

In the rest of the Free World, train service, as well as most public transport, is more subsidized, and runs better.
The rest of the world doesn't travel the distances we do. That's kind of a big factor in the cost dept., you know...
Of course the size of the US must be taken into account. But subsidizing public transport is not all that bad an investment when you consider all the hidden costs of driving cars. Like fighting a $2 trillion war in order to guarantee your oil supplies. And the medical costs associated with all the smog and pollution. And the global warming. In fact, when all the costs are analyzed, public transport is a downright bargain. NYC subway is 100 years old and helps to make NYC the most energy efficient city in America.
Believe it or not, I agree with you.
Of course many in the current Congress still considers public transit the same thing as socialism. So it's time to vote those clowns out...
Well, let's not put the cart in front of the horse here - those same "clowns" aren't just against the (bordering on) boondoggle that is our public transit system; they're against most of the bullshit plans put out by the spendthrift clowns you cast your vote for.

Really? Why? :confused: Are you afraid of flying?
I'm not afraid of flying at all, it just makes me very physically uncomfortable. Even if I take decongestants and chew gum, the descent still makes my ears hurt so much that I cry and afterwards I can't hear right for up to 4 or 5 hours. It's also inconvenient and time consuming... For instance, if I were to go to New York City, it would take longer to fly than to drive because of the time spent in airports at each end. Of course with gas prices how they are, driving no longer really as much of an advantage as far as price, but it depends what you're driving.

Also I just like the train. I think it's fun to ride. The plane is not fun, even not including the physical discomfort. Plus there's better food on the train usually.

I would much rather ride the train than fly.

I would --and I am being completely honest-- rather undergo a root canal than to take a 4 hour airplane trip.

I would --and I am being completely honest-- rather undergo a root canal than to take a 4 hour airplane trip.
i just had a root canal, and i'd rather have another than get on another airplane too!

Root canals are not that bad at all... I think I'd rather fly though. Especially if I could go first class! :D

Also I just like the train. I think it's fun to ride.

Let's hope she's talking about the type of "train" that runs on tracks, and not on females who go "round the block, OG style".

And if that's the case... that, along with Comrad Freethinker, whose license plate is probably as red as the old Russian Flag... bringing in tons of Russians who would LOVE to "run a train" on some young female. Speaking of that "old Russian flag".. it would be just that: It would be the HAMMER... and the SICKLE! Stick to civilian transportation trains, Dark.

:drive:

Root canals are not that bad at all... I think I'd rather fly though. Especially if I could go first class! :D
root canal, flying 1st class...they cost about the same.

Originally Posted by DarkFantasy96
Also I just like the train. I think it's fun to ride.

Let's hope she's talking about the type of "train" that runs on tracks, and not on females who go "round the block........

Wow. You're a real class act.

:rolleyes:

Wow. You're a real class act.

:rolleyes:

Coming from you... that's a compliment. :thumbs:

Let's hope she's talking about the type of "train" that runs on tracks, and not on females who go "round the block, OG style".
Yeah, that seems likely. :rolleyes: That was pretty freakin' juvenile (and not to mention, insulting), Decka.

You should know by now, only I'm allowed to say lewd things to DF, but there IS a prerequisite: the comments have to be at least somewhat tasteful. ;)

Yeah, that seems likely. :rolleyes: That was pretty freakin' juvenile (and not to mention, insulting), Decka.

You should know by now, only I'm allowed to say lewd things to DF, but there IS a prerequisite: the comments have to be at least somewhat tasteful. ;)
:o i started typing something along the same lines, but i at least have the maturity (even when medicated) to use the backspace key.:D

Hahahaha... I honestly have no comment on this one...

Hahahaha... I honestly have no comment on this one...

I was going to comment, but I thought I'd wait to see what you had to say. Now that you've commented, I will.

That was low, Decka...very low, even for you.

Hey, no worries, Vile. I agree that Decka was being immature and crude, but it's not like I haven't said worse things. (The difference being that when I say them they're usually funny... :thumbs:)

That was low, Decka...very low, even for you.

It did not seem to me to be much of a departure from his usual level.

Yea, it was low.. I didn't think anyone would take it seriously... obviously Dark didn't, but if she did, I would hate to think she would allow a post on a thread to darken her day... and I apologize for any offense taken.

Everyone else, however, and ROT and go to.... HEAVEN! Combat hate with love baby!

Perhaps it's because I see nothing wrong with the sort of "train" you were talking about anyways.

To each their own... obviously many girls don't mind going "round the block"... and picking up the 3am man-train. It's almost looked on as a positive thing for girls in today's society to express themselves as promiscuous and "whore-ish"...

To each their own... obviously many girls don't mind going "round the block"... and picking up the 3am man-train. It's almost looked on as a positive thing for girls in today's society to express themselves as promiscuous and "whore-ish"...

It's cool for guys to have a lot of sex, but if women do it they are whores. Weird double standard.

Besides, women can have multiple orgasms. I can't blame 'em.

Combat hate with love baby!

Yeah. Right.

I guess that would be the sort of "love" you were dispensing a few posts ago with your speculation that DarkFantasy might be saying she enjoys participating in gang bangs, when she mentioned she 'liked trains'.

Garsh........that Christian love sure is a wonderful thang.

:D

I surely don't think so.. but i'm not a stereotypical machoist, egotistical guy...

It's almost looked on as a positive thing for girls in today's society to express themselves as promiscuous and "whore-ish"...

Apparently you think it's also a positive thing to express yourself in a crude and tasteless fashion.

Yeah. Right.

I guess that would be the sort of "love" you were dispensing a few posts ago with your speculation that DarkFantasy might be saying she enjoys participating in gang bangs, when she mentioned she 'liked trains'.

Garsh........that Christian love sure is a wonderful thang.

:D

Well hey, it came out of my "mouth" FT (actually, i typed it).. so I must have meant it with the deepest importance from the bottom of my heart... right?

No, I wouldn't classify that as one of my "serious posts"... just a stray from the subject. Interesting how this thread got all juicy once I involved some drama.. kind of typical, no wonder why reality TV is so "in" right now.

Unfortunately, you really don't know me at all... but feel free to judge me, but I won't judge you, at least your soul. As far as deserving to go to heaven, we are on the same level IMO. I just am reaching for mercy while you choose not to, which is your choice, and quite fine in this secular nation.

I am guilty of murdering your "good name" though... at least your online identity... for that I am guilty, and if it offends you.. I definitely apologize. Not normally my cup of tea, but I'm not hear to represent the Christian faith.. I am a human being... enough said.

Apparently you think it's also a positive thing to express yourself in a crude and tasteless fashion.

No... my post was absolutely tasteless and crude, if taken in a serious context...

Perhaps it's because I see nothing wrong with the sort of "train" you were talking about anyways.
:eek:

Are you serious?

Apparently you think it's also a positive thing to express yourself in a crude and tasteless fashion.
Maybe you kinda have to to make fun of it (not that I'm condoning what he said, mind you). I mean, seriously - he does kinda have a point; American society nowadays has a tendency to popularize that kind of promiscuous behavior (think; Paris Hilton, for example). I find her actions to be, by and large, morally repugnant, but for whatever reason, I still want to nail her.

Okay, so I'm conflicted....

:eek:

Are you serious?
I wouldn't do it but I wouldn't look down on a girl who did.

Besides, women can have multiple orgasms.

...and guys can't?

I would --and I am being completely honest-- rather undergo a root canal than to take a 4 hour airplane trip.

Try 14. No joke. Atlanta to Seoul. Tokyo to Chicago was 12.

I wouldn't do it but I wouldn't look down on a girl who did.
I would. That's just gross, IMHO.

I would. That's just gross, IMHO.
not so bad if you're 1st in line, but the closer you get to being customer #9...:bike:

not so bad if you're 1st in line, but the closer you get to being customer #9...:bike:
Even if you're "first", you're probably not.