« Berkeley Signs UN Treaties | Main | A Modest Proposal »

:O
Is there an ichthyologist(burns specialty) in the house!?

I feel sorry for the fish. They were innocent bystanders in a family of incredibly low-class people. :/

Goldfish always get the short end of the stick- they're cheap, often used as feeder food and given away at county fairs to people who know nothing about fish and dump them into unfiltered chlorinated water. TT_TT

I do agree that some (most?) of the animal-rights people are nuts, though. Loving animals and worshiping them are two different things...

Isn't that stretch Pelousy without makeup?

Yeah, we'd never make it in Berkeley. We've got our own PETA.....People who Enjoy Tasty Animals.

Eating the goldfish was seriously unbalanced though. I hope he takes her jewelry and tosses it into the nearest dumpster. Followed swiftly by her spoiled little heinie!

I wonder if czar cass will try file suit in federal court.

I believe the proper PC term these days is "Sea Kitten"

Anyone who feels sorry for the goldfish needs to get out more. It's a freaking goldfish. They are listed as "food" in the food chain.

Nature's way, get over it.

I don't feel particularly sorry for the goldfish (they're freakin' goldfish, after all), but I'm pretty sure that entering a dwelling with the intent to commit a crime (like theft of someone's property - even if it's just some goldfish) is burglary in most states.

Now... That is funny!

PETA will demand she get life in prison knowing how absolutly stupid PETA is

It almost sounds like the storyline from a Greek tragedy.

Barrack Hussein Goldfish Mmm Mmm Mm

Guys, just an off-topic question: The left is for more state control while the right is for less, yeah? So how come anarchists (zero state control) are classified as far left while fascists (max state control) are classified as far right? What's the justification?

He took back the jewels, she stole the fish; sounds like a good deal to me. Until...

Why would she COOK AND EAT the fish? Was he going to kill and eat the jewels?

Every frat boy on the face of the earth knows you don't have to cook goldfish before eating them. What is gained by cooking goldfish? Do they taste better? Are they less slippery? Would you really sort the bones out of the flesh?

Jail for her: Laughing with him for his escape from this psycho bitch.

burning hot, where did you see Anarchists defined as 'left'?

I do see a lot of anarchists joining the leftist protests at various places. They just use it as an excuse to throw rocks and burn shit. Of course that's because a lot of the lefty protesters are throwing rocks and burning shit (so lets join in the fun).

In truth I don't believe they are anarchists, merely hooligans. The lame stream media will often classify them as 'anarchists' to legitimize what is otherwise merely out of control hoodlums.

BTW, was she super hot looking? I could always use a super hot looking psycho bitch in my life to give another whacko story to be in the news about my actions about. (there were no pics on the reference site)

Imagine, if you will, this story taking place in Seattle, NYC, or Heaven forbid, Berkeley. Our heroine ... would have landed on death row, or at least gotten 3-5 years, for animal cruelty

Maybe, but who gives a shit?

Again, what is the point here? "Imagine if" scenarios....man, do you have an extreme amount of free time on your hands Van Helsing.

Let's imagine you all weren't such idiots shall we?

Posted by: BURNING HOT at September 30, 2009 10:32 PM

Good question.

Politics are commonly defined on two axises; personal freedoms and economic freedoms. In American politics, the left believes in more personal freedoms and less economic freedoms, the right believes in less personal freedoms and more economic freedoms.

Anarchists and fascists, in that context, are categorized by their stance on personal freedoms; anarchists want the maximum, fascists want the minimum.

Here, though? It's due to attribution error. The people in this blog like to lump together people they don't like (leftists==gays==pedophiles==anarchists). It's a common human tendency to consider your side as virtuous and attribute all negative things to your opponents.

While I'm here, I'm going to object to term "Indian Giver". The phrase was brought about mostly by American settlers failing to understand that the natives were trying to trade, not just giving them things. It is a racist term that just illustrates the idiocy of the people who use it.

(Yes, yes, I know racism is overplayed right now. This is referring to something concrete and specific.)

Also, I thought you guys were law-and-order types? Destruction of property is a crime, the police should have at least issued a report.

Posted by: hey you guys at October 1, 2009 2:49 AM,

Anarchists don't want maximum personal freedoms, they want people to agree with them or else. I've taken note of the brave nature of anarchists and the pack mentality they have. Just try disagreeing with one of them and you'll find out real quick that they are wearing two masks. One to hide there face from police and cameras and the second is so-called anarchism to hide the fact they are fascists.

As far as the left beliving in more personal freedoms, I disagree. The left has been salivating over gaining access to personal information of potential political rivals for quiet some time. It is little wonder why they are pushing so hard for a single payer health care system that will only 1) bankrupt this country and 2) give them access to every last detail of every ones life. Don't give me this sanctimonious bullshit about helping people and providing for them. This is the left trying to help themselves to everything and anything about YOU. These same shits don't want to give up the health care plan they have but they certainly feel there health care plan for the peasants, peons and commoners like you are me should be a given. After all they're our political masters and there lives clearly matter more than ours. YAY for the left thanks for clarifying something i've always known.

As far as this fish fry goes. If this was any other state but texas, say a moonbat controllsed state. The man would have been arrested, after all feminists believe men are the root cause of all our problems.

Non-story that proves and demonstrates nothing.
Good work

"Politics are commonly defined on two axises; personal freedoms and economic freedoms. In American politics, the left believes in more personal freedoms and less economic freedoms, the right believes in less personal freedoms and more economic freedoms."

Bullshit.

Economic freedoms cannot be divorced from personal freedoms. What use is "personsl freedom" if you don't have the right to spend *your* money the way that *you* want to? Economic freedom is the most basic of all personal freedoms; otherwise, you are nothing more that a slave for the state. Leftists like to crow about how they champion "personal" freedoms, like producing offensive art through the NEA (funded by others), providing 'free' services (funded by others), etc, etc....

All freedoms that we have are based on personal (not "collective") ownership of property. The most basic piece of property you own is YOU. You own YOU.... and all of the labor and innovation that YOU produce. The most basic of freedoms is your right to take that which you own (i.e., YOU), and use it in any way that you want to. That includes your money. Well, at least what money Obambi doesn't steal from you first to pay for his outlandish give-aways to generational Democrats and dirtbags in Chicago.

Leftists are just grifters, trying the latest scam (nowadays it's "global warming"... um I mean "climate change") to steal from those who actually work.

Anonymous: How dare you insult Van Helsing. He didn't post this, I did. Yup, plenty of time on my hands. :D

hey you guys: I carefully chose "Indian-giving" because of its meaning in our modern culture - albeit historically/technically inaccurate as you suggest.
Plus: yes, law and order and all that. This seems a domestic dispute, common-law or not. I don't know law and if any significant ones were broken by either person (they bought the fish together, so they were partly hers), but I'm suggesting that some jurisdictions would have gone off the handle with "animal cruelty".

Mostly, the whole pathetic news story was a lame excuse to get that picture of Nancy Pelosi posted on the site.

Posted by: Moonbat SkullCracker at October 1, 2009 3:19 AM

See? Attribution error. What you're describing is psychotic behavior. Psychotic people tend to be ambitious, so they often end up in positions of authority. However, this is hardly broken down by political philosophy; power is power. Ben Stein, arch conservative, wants to bankrupt the country by building a military that could defeat half the world's armies all at once.

Also, personal information? Really? How would that help? That much information would be useless, anything juicy would be buried underneath a mountain of data. Plus, it's not exactly like your life is private now. If anyone takes the time to focus on you, they can find out basically anything they want to already. Political hacks have been trying to get personal information on each other as long as there's been politics.

Eh, but denigrating the desire to help people and calling yourself "SkullCracker" is indicative of psychotic behavior by itself. You might just be jealous.

I still don't get why she fried up the fish. If they meant that much to him, she should have held them hostage. Or, at the worst, flushed them. I just can't see eating fried goldfish. It's not like it's catfish or grouper or tilapia or something, it's nasty little gold fish.

Nice post, Hiram. Leftists always try to make the argument that if you just hand all your assets over to the state they'll take care of EVERYTHING and you'll be free to pursue the loftier things in life. Yeah, right!

"The most basic of freedoms is your right to take that which you own (i.e., YOU), and use it in any way that you want to. "

That means I can imbibe or inhale anything I want? I mean it's my body, right? ... No?

Well, if I disagree with the government's policies, I should not pay taxes, since I don't agree with what they're doing... No?

I can buy a flag and burn it; I mean it's my flag... No?

Can I have sex with whatever adult I want? ... No?

Can I kill, steal, and cheat? Those benefit me. ... No?

(Hey, laws are abridgments of freedom too; granted, usually only those freedoms involving the harming of others.)

Yes, there is significant overlap between the two, but you're talking about the far end of the scale. The common debate in politics is how much corporations should be regulated and taxed; that's the sort of thing I was referring to.

In American politics, the left believes in more personal freedoms and less economic freedoms

Forgive me while I roll on the floor...

The left believes in neither and stifles both.

AmericanToTheCore:

Given the massive changes in personal freedoms brought about by the left in the last 150 years, it does seem that Liberals care quite a lot for personal freedoms.

massive changes

Change != good.

Remember, there is no absolute correlation so, regardless of what has happened, you're oversimplifying.

Example:

You have $10. Now give me $10. Theoretically, that's change (the state of both you and I is different). Who's happy? Not you. Case and point.

AmericanToTheCore:

What the (I'm an asshole) does that have to do with anything?
Obviously you're trying to say that change isn't always good, but that analogy was pathetic.

Aquasnot, Watch your language little lady.

Farmer Ted:

I'll use whatever sodding words I want to.
Freedom of speech, (but I'm an asshole).

I said I'm an asshole.

You said homosexuality is a disease and Muslims are like cockroaches.

So I'm an asshole.

Friend.

Obviously you're trying to say that change isn't always good, but that analogy was pathetic.

Little do you realize (ignorance is bliss, eh?) that the analogy I posted is the equivalent of ALL liberal policies. It's called redistribution of wealth which comes as a result of people WANTING without WORKING for it.

The left is bereft of personal responsibility.

Its because we 're awesome.

Face.

Its useless trying to get through to you, I'm just going to outright insult you now, but bear in mind these are my opinions and I don't speak for every Liberal.

You're a friend.

aquatarkus, your posts have been cleaned up because you're a foul-fingered twerp with a rotten attitude.

This blog is like Van Helsing's home. I'm his roomie. We love to entertain dipdork moonbats, even allow them to make themselves look foolish. But if you come in and crap on the carpet and piss on our other guests, we're of course going to have to clean it up.

Besides, how dare you besmirch the good name of an excellent Emerson Lake and Palmer album.

Why did you replace 'tosser' with 'friend'?
why not 'loser' or 'silly goose'?

Hmm...
Retroactively changing my words...
Reminds 1 me 9 of 8 something 4 ............

ThaHts veYry clevePr, yoOu sChoRuld bIe pTrouEd of ySourselves.

Where was I?
Oh yeah.

You're a bellend.

I'm not a prude, but your quips were a bit over the line. Adding color is fine, to a point. If you want to join in the discussion and crap all over us knuckle-dragging conservatives, within reason, then please do. If you don't like it then don't comment. :D

We've dope-slapped indecorous far-righties and racists/white supremicists before, too. :D

If you want to pay for your own blog, then you can be a potty mouth on it, fine by me. :D

Ballsack.

Aquasnot, Oxford just called and wants your English Lit diploma back. By the way Oxford is a college,in case you didn't know.

Aquasnot? seriously?
Thats the best can think of?

Unlike you aquasnot I try and keep my language clean on this blog. By the way you may want to ask mummzy to put some talcom powder on that case of diaper rash you have.

Who are you trying to impress?

I'm not trying to impress anyone. You see little boy you don't have to cuss everyother word to be a man. Men know that there is a time to get angry and cuss unlike a child such as yourself who thinks cussing makes them look like a big man. Take my advice and go over to kos or huffpo you'll be among children there and should feel more comfortable.

Posted by: hiram at October 1, 2009 3:27 AM

Second the excellent post from hiram.

------------

Posted by: hey you guys at October 1, 2009 4:07 AM

That means I can imbibe or inhale anything I want? I mean it's my body, right? ... No?

IF YOU'VE PAID FOR IT WITH THE MONEY YOU EARNED AT A JOB, SURE.

BUT WHEN YOUR LACK OF BRAIN CELLS FROM IMBIBING WHATEVER MAKES YOU A SAFETY HAZARD OR AN ECONOMIC BURDEN TO OTHERS, WE'RE CUTTING YOU OFF AND SENDING YOU THE BILL.

Well, if I disagree with the government's policies, I should not pay taxes, since I don't agree with what they're doing... No?

THAT'S ACTUALLY A GOOD IDEA! LET US KNOW WHEN THE IRS SAYS THAT WE DON'T HAVE TO PAY TAXES TO SUPPORT OBAMA'S CORRUPTOCRATS, WILLYA?

I can buy a flag and burn it; I mean it's my flag... No?

TECHNICALLY YES, BUT WHY WOULD YOU WANT TO DESTROY THE SYMBOL OF A COUNTRY YOU SAY YOU LOVE?

Can I have sex with whatever adult I want? ... No?

IF YOU CAN FIND ANOTHER ADULT WHO WANTS TO HAVE SEX WITH YOU, GO FOR IT. JUST DON'T EXPECT US TO PAY FOR YOUR PENICILLIN AND/OR ABORTIONS

Can I kill, steal, and cheat? Those benefit me. ... No?

SURE, IT'LL PROBABLY GET YOU A POST IN OBAMA'S ADMINISTRATION. ANYWHERE ELSE YOU GET IN JAIL FOR INFRINGING ON SOMEONE ELSE'S RIGHTS.

SEE? THE FACT THAT YOU WANT TO KILL, STEAL, AND CHEAT PROVES THAT YOU LEFTISTS HAVE NO RESPECT AT ALL FOR OTHER PEOPLE.

The common debate in politics is how much corporations should be regulated and taxed; that's the sort of thing I was referring to.

ARE YOU A CORPORATION THEN? BECAUSE ALL THE THINGS YOU ASKED ABOUT DOING WAS BASED ON YOUR OWN PERSONAL BEHAVIOR, NOT A CORPORATIONS. WEIRD.

Okay everyone, thanks for the discussion on anarchists.

But why are fascists 'far right' even as defined by Europeans? (Though the Right is Europe is more left than the Left in America - the National Socialists i.e. Nazis were less socialist than their political opponents!)

Does it come down to who implements more restrictions on life?

Conservatives - marriage & sex, drugs, lawbreaking, border security, terrorists

Liberals - taxes, smoking, contents of food, CO2, guns, speech (political correctness vs talk radio), public displays of religion except for Islam