What Kind of Politician Lies Turn You Off? And Turn You On?


Here's a question for those of you who are not principled non-voters (un-voters?):

What sorts of lies from politicians and candidates really turn you off? To the point that you would never consider voting for someone?

Here are two quick examples.

Delaware GOP senate candidate Christine O'Donnell has plainly misrepresented the hell out of her academic background, work history (or lack thereof), and (likely) anti-masturbation stance. She sets the record straight in a new campaign ad by declaring openly that "I'm not a witch" and that, in fact, "I'm you."

Then there's Connecticut Democratic senate candidate Dick Blumenthal, who has repeatedly lied about his (lack of) Vietnam combat experience, saying or implying that he "served" in the shit. Problem is, he never it made more than a few clicks south of the Nutmeg State:

Mr. Blumenthal, a Democrat now running for the United States Senate, never served in Vietnam. He obtained at least five military deferments from 1965 to 1970 and took repeated steps that enabled him to avoid going to war, according to records.

Blumenthal's lies have given rise to this attack ad, which is kind of weird and effective, though would be even better if Blumenthal strangled kittens or walked on ducklings while wearing golf shoes or something like that:

On the face of it, the Blumenthal lies are more disturbing to me because lying about something like military service just seems more epically insulting and fucked-up than fibbing about your 97 lb. weakling education cred (O'Donnell misrepresented when she got her B.A. and did the same about taking courses at prominent colleges). Yet in the final analysis, it's their actual records (or lack thereof) that worry me more.

O'Donnell doesn't have a record to run on or away from, other than a series of embarrassing appearances on the Bill Maher Show 1.0, robo-calls from disgruntled staffers from her Alan Keyes-level previous bids for office, and a seemingly bogus discrimination lawsuit against a former conservative employer. That's all deeply unsettling, despite her willingness to campaign on a cut-spending platform.

Blumenthal, who serves as Connecticut's attorney general, has a record that can be summed up as "Bullying Busybody for Senate." Whether it's drinking, gambling, guns, you name it, the guy stinks on just about every possible issue and, like most state-level AGs, is constantly looking for the next big score regardless of individual rights, the rule of law, you name it.

O'Donnell's lies suggest she is unhinged from reality, which is generally not a characteristic to be encouraged in politicians. Yet her utter failure so far in life makes her seem less scary and more sad. Blumenthal's lies and long list of disturbing "successes" make me fear him more. He's fabulously wealthy, well-connected, and knows how to get stuff done (shiver!).

But they both end up in the same place for me if I were ever able to throw a ballot lever for either of them: I wouldn't vote for them if they were the only folks running. I'd write in my old friend from high school that I've been trying to get on an FBI watch list for decades now.

NEXT: Reason Morning Links: Pentagon Goes Green, Dems Gain in Polls, Free Loans in Japan

Editor's Note: We invite comments and request that they be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of Reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment for any reason at any time. Report abuses.

  1. Hartford. . .shit; I’m still only in Hartford. . . . Every time I think I’m gonna wake up back in the jungle.

    1. Great, now there’s coffee all over my laptop screen. You’ll pay for this, Libertate!

      1. I’ve seen horrors. . .horrors that you’ve seen.

    2. I wanted an insurance compnay middle-management position. For my sins, they gave me one.

  2. The misrepresentations that could somehow translate into some stupid new policy, regulation or law would be what would kill my voter boner.

  3. If I must choose between someone who lies about her resume and someone who is a Marxist I will vote for the liar. But in truth if I lived in Delaware (I once did but no longer do) I would probably vote for a third party candidate who supports free markets (i.e. an LP candidate if one were on the ballot)

    1. Are there any other parties even listed on the ballot? In most years, neither major party really gives a hoot about my home state of Delaware. I haven’t voted in Delaware since 1978.

      The interest in Delaware is soley becuase of O’Donnell’s relationship with the Tea Party. No one outside of Delaware would give a rats ass about Delaware if Castle had won the primary.

      1. I will need to do more research to verify this but according to the [ALWAYS reliable] Wikipedia there are at least two other candidates running:
        # Glenn Miller (I)
        # James Rash (L)

        1. OK, here is the website for Jim Rash


        2. I love Glenn Miller. Too bad he’s been dead for over 65 years.

          1. I liked his early stuff. A lot of his latter stuff though just sounded like elevator music.

            1. It did, however, make him some phat bank.

          2. “Some damn tribe of withered old bitches doesn’t want us to terminate that fleabag hotel. All because Glenn Miller and his band once took a shit there. Just like Kansas. Remember fucking Kansas?”

            1. “Save The Memorial Oak Tree” Society. Showed those fucks.

              1. I don’t patronize bunny rabbits.

      2. Delaware’s Senate vote does count, does it not?

        1. Not in the ivory tower it don’t

  4. O’Donnell’s lies suggest she is unhinged from reality, which is generally not a characteristic to be encouraged in politicians.

    Nor is it particularly unique.

    1. Yea, the very idea that they think we all signed some sort of “social contract” makes them all unhinged from reality.

    2. Anyone who is not unhinged from reality is either hedonistic or suicidal.

      Sanity is just a matter of being unhinged from reality the same way the majority of people are.

    3. Well, at least O’Donnell is entertainingly unhinged, which is a step up from most politicians.

  5. I’d write in my old friend from high school that I’ve been trying to get on an FBI watch list for decades now.

    Ha Ha ha

    My mother, who used to be involved in politics at the Pennsylvania Township level years ago, once got elected to be the Township tax collector by one vote…literally one vote. No one was running for the office and one person wrote in my mom’s name on the ballot.

    It turns out that while the Township tax collector was an elected office by the Township Charter, the elected office position paid next to nothing and nobody ever ran for the office. The township typically just hired someone to do the work.

  6. “You can’t masturbate without lust!”

    Hey, it seems you are not me.

  7. Yet her [O’Donnell’s] utter failure so far in life makes her seem less scary and more sad.

    In your opinion, of course. Otherwise, “failure” according to what benchmark? Yours? Mine? My dog’s? Your dog’s? I don’t have a dog, by the way.

    1. Blumenthal, who serves as Connecticut’s attorney general, has a record that can be summed up as “Bullying Busybody for Senate.”

      I am dearly more concerned about Blumenthal’s “success” in life as a hired goon for the State than O’Donnell’s supposed “failure.” Just sayin’.

      1. Ding. Blumenthal is far more dangerous. But as it turns out, these two aren’t running against each other.

        It’s possible to oppose both of them.

        Which brings us back to O’Donnell being silly, versus her oppponent being wrong.

        On the issues likely to come before the Senate, I think I prefer O’Donnell’s vote.

        The key fact is that I’m not registered to vote in Delaware, so I’m not required to care.

        1. Re: bubba,

          But as it turns out, these two aren’t running against each other.

          Already know that. O’Donnell is running against a self-avowed communist… the choice should be clear: a person who, given the power, could turn this country to shit . . . or a pretty witch.

          I prefer the pretty witch, as long as her mother is not name Endora.

          1. She’s chubby and not a witch. She’s an idiot who doesn’t understand evolution and a nanny-state bitch who wants to control where my middle finger is at all times.

            But I’d still vote for her before the other guy.

  8. Yes,
    Resume puffing, in this case listing a college that you took a class at under an “education” subhead,

    Is exactly the same as being a proven pathological liar in service to the state.

    Why are establishment douches of all strips so afraid of this woman?

    That makes me support her more with each ham fisted attack.

    1. “Why are establishment douches of all strips so afraid of this woman?”

      Because she defeated an establishment douche who voted for TARP. I wish every asshole who voted for TARP had lost in the primary but perhaps that was too much to hope for. I am at least thankful she rid the world of one.

      1. Exactly,

        I’d think a libertarian publication would favor incompetent politicians that espoused a small government philosophy over career pols every time.

        The delaware establishment hates her because she won’t be able to make sure that they get their “fair share” of the loot.

        Fuck them.

        1. Fuck them is right. And Reason wants to be part of the establishment. They don’t want to tear it down, they want to convert it and become the establishment. That is why they kiss its ass so much.

        2. “I’d think a libertarian publication…”



          1. is that really a drink? or are you implying that Reason isn’t a libertarian publication. Oh, establishment!

        3. I’d think a libertarian publication would favor incompetent politicians that espoused a small government philosophy over career pols every time.

          1. She’s going to lose to an even more vomitous career politician than Castle in November. So all your support for this nutjob who happens to say small-governmentish things when she isn’t talking to her toaster, is going to accomplish less than nothing. (The real question is, why small govt supporters in DE couldn’t find a better candidate to run for their cause)

          2. The problem with nutjobs is, you never know which direction their nutjobbery is going to go in. She might say the right things before the election and then introduce a bill banning aspirin once she gets inaugurated because the voices in her head told her to.

          1. How many of us are registered to vote in Delaware?

            My anonymous “support” for her isn’t changing reality even one tiny bit.

          2. But Castle would have done more damage than Coons will. The problem with people like Castle who claim to believe in small government but really don’t is that they cut the legs out from under people who actually do. Castle would have been a professional concern troll in Washington.

            The media would have embraced him. And he would have been on every Sunday talk show telling the country how people like Rand Paul are nuts. And that would have allowed Democrats and the media to look at Paul or anyone else who dared speak up against government and say “see even one of your own thinks you are nuts”. That would have done a lot more damage than Coons, a person of limited intelligence who will be written off as another hard left liberal, could have ever done. An honest statist Democrat like Coons is much preferable to a fifth columnist Republican like Castle.

            1. +99999999999999999999999999

          3. So all your support for this nutjob who happens to say small-governmentish things when she isn’t talking to her toaster, is going to accomplish less than nothing.

            It got rid of Castle. That’s a good thing.

            1. Maybe the best scenario would have been Castle winning the primary in a squeaker. He’d then be forced to keep the tea party’s views in mind when he cast he votes or face a far more formidable challenger in the future.
              A lot of these craven politicians who win are going to be kept in line by accountability projects run by tea partiers. I don’t think the bad votes are going to be swept under the rug or winked at in the future.

              1. Maybe if he were a Rep but not as a Senator. A Senate term is six years. And Castle is 70 years old. He might not have even ran for re-election. He would have lied his ass off to get elected and then pivoted and enjoyed being David Brooks’ favorite senator.

          4. (The real question is, why small govt supporters in DE couldn’t find a better candidate to run for their cause)

            Because when you’ve only got three of them, the margin of error gets really, really big.

    2. I’m afraid that she’ll turn me into a newt.

        1. I got better.

          1. Dennis, there’s some lovely filth down here…

    3. I read what you meant to type as “r?sum?-puffing” as an imperative that I “resume puffing.”

      Don’t mind if I do.

  9. Yet her utter failure so far in life

    I cannot speak for O’Donnell, but (generally speaking) I have learned more from my failures than I have from my successes.

    1. Politicians never learn.

  10. Blumenthal’s lies and long list of disturbing “successes” make me fear him more.

    As you should. He is a more polished Spitzer, and I guarantee he’s less likely to make Spitzer’s mistakes (you know, banging prostitutes in direct contrast to your own prosecution of prostitutes).

    Blumenthal is exactly the type of politician that you should fear: he is driven, intelligent, and absolutely convinced of his own justification.

    1. I love the Spitz as a disgraced, out-of-office politician, hungry for a comeback that will never happen. He’s like Rocky in Rocky III, except that Apollo never comes to straighten him out.

      1. I love the fact that Kathleen Parker, who spends half of her columns bitching about the need for “decency” has now whored herself out to do a show with Client Number 9. Parker is worse than Spitzer’s old hooker. At least that girl sold her virtue in private.

      2. Spitzer is a scumbag in any way of looking at it, and I know we got a tremendous amount of amusement at his downfall, but at the same time, I was relieved. He’s like Greg Stillson; you just know that if Johnny didn’t derail him, he would end up doing something horrible.

        Blumenthal worries me the same way.

        1. I absolutely despised him from very early on. He abused power like crazy, and acted without legal authority to get public notice. The worst kind of political opportunist.

          But I enjoy his new life. I wish he’d embrace it and become a full-time entertainer.

          1. If he had gone off and lived a quiet life, he probably would have found some contentment. But the fact that he is still out there shucking and jiving trying to rebuild his career tells you that it must be killing him to no longer be in power or be an important person. In that sense, I can see why you find his post politics career as a circus clown on CNN to be satisfying.

            1. There’s a word for what Spitzer does for the world today.

        2. Spitzer’s problems were personal.

          Ooh! Ooh! Did you guys see the story about the Federal Judge who got busted for soliciting a ho and buying her drugs?

          His attorney went to the same school Spitzeer does. He claimed that his transgressions were a marital issue, not a public issue. His issues were that of a “husband”, not of a judge.

          I was all, “Snap!”

          1. If he has ever presided over a trial involving prostitution or drugs where the defendant is found guilty, it’s not personal anymore. Same with Spitzer as AG.

            1. So you say.

    2. Blumenthal is exactly the type of politician that you should fear: he is driven, intelligent, and absolutely convinced of his own justification.

      I’m not convinced of that. Lying about facts that are easily investigated, like your military service record, is a supremely stupid thing to do. Maybe he’s just a compulsive liar, but (as we’ve seen) that’s enough to get you in trouble too.

      1. I’m with Tulpa on this one. It’s easier to avoid being caught bangin’ hos and snortin’ blow.

        He lied about something for which there are organizations dedicated to looking up the service records of people who make public claims about their time in the military (or lack thereof).

        I guarantee you that if I walked in front of a TV camera and started talking about my Silver Star I got in Fallujah, there’d be a facebook page in ten minutes exposing my lies.

  11. Publish the name of your friend and we’ll all write him in.

  12. absolutely convinced of his own justification

    I’d be stupid not to be, when I’m right!


  13. If O’Donnell were the daughter of someone power, she would already be a Senator. Which is worse, fluffing your resume (something I bet the entire staff at Reason has done at least once) or getting kicked out of Harvard for cheating like Ted Kennedy? O’Donnell is no worse than any of the class of idiot sons and daughters that currently inhabit the Congress.

    Blumenthal in contrast is a legitimately evil human being. He is everything that is destroying this country. O’Donnel is kind of an interesting crank. Blumenthal is a menace. And Coons hold economic and political views that should in a sane country prohibit him from holding any form of public office.

    1. No doubt that neither is someone anyone in their right mind–except maybe a Marxist witch–would actively support. If I were voting in that race, I’d probably vote LP. If I had to choose, well, like many here, I’d rather have the lying witch than a person who ever thought Marxism was an acceptable idea. Even if that’s more smoke than fire.

      1. But you can’t let someone like Coons in the Senate. The guy really is a dangerous moron. O’Donnell may not be Daniel Webster, but she would be unlikely to do much harm. Coons in contrast, like Blumenthal, would be a menace. You have to vote for O’Donnell for the simple reason of keeping Coons away from any authority.

    2. If you support O’Donnell just because she pisses off your ideological opponents, John, you’re making a mistake. There are no “interesting cranks”. There are only dangerous political scumbags.

      1. What do you think O’Donnell is actually going to do? I can name about four things right now that Coons would vote for and O’Donnell wouldn’t that would do real damage to the country. What would O’Dennell vote for that Coons wouldn’t that would do real damage? And would any of those things be as damaging as the list below?

        Card Check
        Cap and Trade
        Keeping Obamacare
        Raising taxes

        1. I have to laugh when people complain about the Dems “raising taxes”. Read your Friedman – every government expenditure has to be funded and is, by definition, a tax. At least the Dems are honest about paying for all the crap the government is buying. The problem with the GOP is that they show no more willingness to cut than the Dems. The GOP motto is really – all the bennies the Dems give you, but none of the accountability!

          1. LAFFER KURV!!!!1!!!!!

          2. Sure lets raise taxes during what is looking to be an economic depression. It is the responsible, statesman like thing to do. If your bitch at the GOP is that they spend too much they haven’t declared the country open to attack by all our enemies, that is legitimate. But the idea that we must raise taxes to pay for all this bullshit or that the Dems are somehow noble for wanting to raise taxes, is just bullshit.

            1. What’s your point? If you believe all our defense spending is legitimate and necessary than you are supporting raising taxes, the only question is who is going to pay those taxes in the end. Or you could support cutting medicare and social benefits but no politician seems inclined to do that except Rand Paul, and he’ll probably be forced to backpedal.

              1. “If you believe all our defense spending is legitimate and necessary than you are supporting raising taxes”

                Really? Last I looked we collected a lot more money in taxes than we spent on defense. So we could easily have a government that did nothing but defend the country and the other things that are actually named in the Constitution as things the federal government should be doing. It is people like you who want more that have the problem. Not me.

                1. Sure – but no one in the GOP agrees with you, that’s my point. It’s not just the Dems raising taxes, it’s both parties.

          3. I laugh when someone assumes I’m a Republican because I want to cut taxes and “services”. They stopped even trying to do that a long time ago.

            1. Shh. Don’t tell John, you might spoil his illusions.

      2. And O’Donnell ran Mike Castle, who really is a scumbag who has done real damage to the country out of public life. By that act alone, she has done more for small government in this country than any of us ever have.

    3. John, you don’t have to drag Kenedy into it. Lying about your academic record is a Delaware Senatorial tradition!

  14. If Cynthia McKinney made it to Congress, O’Donnel can make it anywhere.

    Anyway, the on the question of which lies turn me off – those that the politicians say every time they communicate.

  15. I’m not sure if a politician lie has every truly turned me on, but I’m thinking a hot Senate candidate claiming that she had a date on top of a satanic altar is as close as it’s going to get.

    1. Can we stop referring to anyone who isn’t a total dog as “hot”? It dilutes the brand. Leighton Meester is hot. Palin and O’Donnell are merely “not ugly”.

      1. Re: Episiarch,

        You’re jesting – Mary Landrieu is merely “not ugly;” Michelle Bachman is merely “not ugly;” Palin is a hot MILF; O’Donnell is quite pretty for a spinster.

      2. O”Donnell is pretty cute. She is a lot more than “not ugly”. You are diluting the brand by refusing to admit anyone you don’t like could be “hot”.

        1. O’Donnell reminds me of Rachel Ray. I love Rachel Ray, she brings home the bacon, fires it up in the pan, and never, ever lets you forget…

          1. Rachel Ray? God, I hate that f%ing bobblehead.

      3. I work in a law firm. The brand has already been diluted for me.

    2. I keep coming back to that phrase–‘she had a date on a Satanic altar’ Is she saying she had a date on a Satanic altar*. Because I can’t see conducting an entire date on an altar. Getting screwed on one, sure.

      *and wouldn’t the altar be annoyed, or want to join in? After all, a Satanic altar is, properly, a nude woman.

  16. I generally support the most un-hinged candidate on the ballot. Sometimes that’s the (L)ibertarian, sometimes the socialist workers party nut, sometimes the UFOlogist. I have no interest in raising the dignity and esteem of our political institutions – in fact I want my fellow citizens to hold them in even lower esteeem.

    If we must raise the dignity of a legislative body, let’s do what RA Wilson recommended for the Congress:
    Fire 33% of the Congress [names selected at random]and replace them with full-grown adult ostritches, whose mysterious and awesome dignity will elevate the suidaen barbarity long established there.

  17. Christine O’Donnell has plainly misrepresented the hell out of…(likely) anti-masturbation stance.

    Is this the new journalism, where you make a vague but negative-sounding claim without providing any evidence?

    1. Who ever said the Jacket was a journalist?

      1. Googling “Nick Gillespie” “journalist” turns up many, many results declaring that Nick Gillespie is, in fact, a journalist.

        1. Sorry that the sarcasm was not more apparent.

          1. Yeah, I thought you probably were but I wasn’t certain. I only got a few hours’ sleep the last couple nights so I ain’t exactly firing on all cylinders.

            1. ….speaking of masturbation….

  18. Lying about service in the Vietnam War has always infuriated me. Not sure why, I was born long after the war ended.

    1. For better or worse and for whatever reason, people hold veterans in high esteem in this country. When shitbag like Blumenthal lies about it and takes advantage of that esteem, he is taking advantage of something that is not his. It is in a way like he is stealing.

      1. Regarding Vietnam Veterans, I think most people actually pity them(even though they never said it), for getting sent over in the shit for god knows what much like our current generation of poor fools (Disclaimer: most veterans I have met have been 4000% percent Men, putting my pathetic existence to shame). This is usually why I have no problem making good on the GI Bill and the like since these guys had their best years stolen from them for lies. If only we could stop impressing people into service against…HOLY SHIT BROWN GUY WITH A FUCKING GUN WHO IS PISSED AT US FOR KILLING HIS WIFE. KIIIIIIIIIILLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLL IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIITTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTT!

        1. Actually study after study shows that among the baby boom, the Vietnam vets are better educated, more economically successful and less prone to things like drug abuse, crime, suicide and divorce than their generational counterparts who didn’t go to war.

          To truth is the vets are the last people that we ought to pity. Things turned out pretty well for them as a group. In contrast, if the country had gotten all of the hippies the help that the needed back in the 70s, they wouldn’t be so fucked up and dysfunctional today.

          1. Hence the disclaimer. I will never pretend to be a millionth the man most of the guys seem to be (Sans politicians who use it and lie about it for political gain). I just can’t “respect” people who were to duped to kill poor foreign bastards for a bunch of falsehoods. In essence, months-years were stolen from them, and like that old woman I robbed on the street for the hell of it today, I could only pity her as I pummelled her kidneys. I do respect Vet’s abilities to kick my ass though.

        2. You shouldn’t be too quick to buy the media / Hollywood version of vets as psycho victim losers. Back when I was a worthless hippie, you could spot the vets. When you met a guy with a house, a wife & baby, and money in the bank – in short, a Life – there’s your veteran. We called them ‘sellouts’ at the time of course, but I eventually grew up, or at least had adulthood thrust upon me.

          1. Once again, to reiterate for the last goddamned time, I don’t pity them because they are stereotypes as depicted by Hollywood, but because they simply had their time/lives/limbs stolen from them for nothing. They didn’t protect us from shit, and many lost arms/legs/testicles for the privilege of being spat upon of future statists. I love it when you have a “weird” or “unpopular” opinion, you are automatically cast as a douche-bag hippie. Like I have money to be a fucking hippie in this job market. I just refuse to worship at the altar of the Veteran.

            Besides, a lot of these Vets now work for, and perpetuate wasteful and worthless government enterprises. So what if they have house? It was stolen from the rest of us.

        3. ‘Brown guy’? Most of our big wars have been against white guys.

          Here’s a tip–you lose a bit of focus with the gratuitous race-card tossing. Didn’t need the ‘brown guy’–


          See? Works just fine.

          1. Maybe but it defends how you count the Mexican War, Indian Wars, the Spanish-American War and subsequent unpleasantness in the Philippines, all sorts of Central American hijinks, etc.

            Still, if it makes you feel better, we have killed a lot of whites too.

            1. “See? Works just fine.”

              No it doesn’t. Not if your only goal is to decorate your-“look at how hawkish I’m not”-plumage with a couple of-“look at how racist I’m not”-feathers. That’s right Drax, flaunt it if you got it.

  19. I’d like O’Donnel to win, but I have to confess, I’d like her a lot more if being disingenuous didn’t come so easy to her.

    1. or if she wasn’t anti-masturbation. Who the fuck is against masturbation?

  20. Sarah ground her crotch forcefully against Christine’s face as she sat upon it. The left side of her distended labia dangled into Christine’s throat like a monstrous uvula; the other slapped loosely against Christine’s right ear. Christine’s nose was buried in Sarah’s anus, forced deeper and deeper as Sarah leaned back to let Christine gasp for a bare half a lungful of air. Christine’s breasts lolled across her chest and into her armpit and back out again with every forceful thrust of Sarah’s hips. They had pierced Christine’s nipples with a safety pin before they began and a thin smear of blood covered them.

    Sarah slipped her hand down Christine’s pale, doughy body as she rocked away, stealing toward the dark thatch of pubic hair sprouting between her legs. As Sarah began to wind her fingers like veiny snakes though the hair toward Christine’s clitoris, Christine began to buck. She exhaled forcefully, Sarah’s labia flapping to creating a drawn out farting noise and filling her cavernous vagina with air. As Sarah swung off of Christine’s face, a protracted queef quickly filled the air with the scent of old scallops and regret.

    “I’m still a virgin, Sarah,” Christine gasped. “I’m not married yet.”

    “Then what are we, you know, doing here, you know?” Sarah asked.

    “I just need to keep myself pure for my husband, so he can have my ladyflower on our wedding night all to himself,” Christine said in a small, meek voice. “I’ll do whatever you want to you, but I need to stay untouched. My peach is still fresh at 41 and Jesus needs me to keep it that way. Jesus knows everything about our vaginas, after all.”

    Sarah slapped her sharply across her face.

    1. You sick fucking beautiful bastard.

    2. that is so very wrong.

      i hate you.

    3. Not content with ruining sex for everyone, now you have to ruin scallops too?

      1. It is a bit redundant, isn’t it? Everyone already knows that regret smells like old scallops.

      2. the scallops line is seared into my memory now. Thanks!

    4. So when does Sarah whip out the John Shaft Special(Patent Pending) on Christine’s out door?

      1. She couldn’t find one made in America. Too many America jobs in the sex toy industry have been lost to overseas operations. But Sarah will bring the strap-on dildo, Fleshlight, and silicone Pussy Foot manufacturing back to Alaska… where it belongs.

        (Don’t click those links. Seriously.)

        1. I need a new strap-on. Max is uncomfortable with the one I use now.

        2. Looks like my job hunting days are over. Been looking to switch careers. Thanks for the tip Nutrasweet.

          Question, why did my boss throw up after she saw that feministing link displayed in full widescreen glory on my work computer? What does “Pack your Shit and Get out of here!” mean?

    5. You magnificent bastard! I salute you!

    6. I would like to know what happens after she slaps her face. And I would like Michelle Bachman to be wrtitten into the story line.

      Also, Sugarfree, is that pussyfoot, or stigmata?

      1. It is a masturbation device that features a vulva and vaginal canal on the sole of a foot.

        The hilariously overheated Feminsiting article.

    7. She’s not really a virgin though. She’s a born-again virgin. She’s acknowledged it.

  21. It’s okay when our side lies. Anything for The Cause.

  22. She sets the record straight in a new campaign ad by declaring openly that “I’m not a witch” and that, in fact, “I’m you.”

    It’s that lie at the very end that I find unforgivable.

  23. It’s the unnecessary lies and exaggerations that bother me most, even more so if they are readily checkable. Makes it look like they just can’t stop themselves. &/or they live in a world of their own with different rules.

  24. There are ways of telling if she is a witch. Does she weight the same as a duck?

  25. I’m curious why you describe her suit against ISI as “seemingly bogus.” The complaint is available on the web and seems legitimate enough on the face of it–perhaps Gillespie could offer his reasons for thinking it is not.

    Also, if one reads the complaint, it’s pretty clear that she is not claiming to have taken masters degree classes at Princeton but to have applied to do so and then had to withdraw because ISI was not giving her the free time that (by her account) they had promised to let her take courses. It’s a little unclear whether she is claiming to have started a course and then had to drop out, or to have dropped out before the course started.


    To: Lt. Richard Blumenthal
    From: Gen’l Wm. Westmooreland

    Re: Top Secret Mission

    Dick – we are organizing a top secret mission to clean out Saigon once and for all, and would like to know would you be willing to take command of the mission. We went through all of the officer files for our best officers who could take command of the mission, and you came out on top as the best one, based on your combat experience and your track record of being willing to step in to the toughest combat assignments. A team of Army Rangers with Huey’s will be assigned to you, and on a completely Top-Secret basis, you will use the mission name only “Dick Blumenthal”. Upon successful completion of this mission, you and your team will be given two weeks R & R in Tokyo. The Pentagon called for you on this Dick, will you accept this mission ?

Please to post comments

Comments are closed.