whinge'n'wank

User since: Saturday, August 20, 2005

Asshole

(idea) by whinge'n'wank (4.9 min) (print) Reputation -10(+5/-15) Sun August 23 2005 at 22:03:45

George W. Bush

Tony Blair

Donald Rumsfeld

Cause they all suck!!!!!!!

What the fuck is this shit? tosser incoherent Noding for Numbers

Kit directs the conversation topic to BOOBIES! again.

<whinge'n'wank> whys my node doing so bad?

<Excalibre> And what node would that be, w'n'w?

<whinge'n'wank> asshole

<eliserh> Thanks, wank, I hadn't seen that yet.

eliserh has fun with softlinks.

<Swap> Um, w'n'w, people here are pretty attached to concepts like complete sentences....

Censorship

(idea) by whinge'n'wank (1 min) (print) Reputation -5(+1/-6) Sun August 24 2005 at 02:05:41

You fuckers better not censer this one cause Shenk v. U.S. says there's gotta be a clear and present danger in order to silence a noders words and thats the fuckin CONSTITUTION, my friend! You aren't just screwin with me your screwin' with all the Framers cause all i wanna do is express my views. Do you FOX junkies have a problem with that????????

Would you like some cheese with that whine? Link and Link Why Johnny can't write Amendment I

Klaproth says I ate your writeup Censorship because it was an affront to grammar, syntax, and spelling, and doesn't even make sense. Node Heaven will be its new home.

<whinge'n'wank> this is fuckin censorship!

yclept agrees...now WHAT were we talking about?

<haze> Hi everyone.

<eliserh> Haze!

<whinge'n'wank> whinge'n'wank is pissed off!

<haze> just type /me. Now what are you pissed off about?

whinge'n'wank am pissed about the censors on this site!

<whinge'n'wank> they deleted a perfectly god article just cause they didnt like my views

<eliserh> would it, by any chance, be censorship?

<whinge'n'wank> yeah. theres nothing wrong with it at all and they just deleted it. its a condemnation of censorship and they censored it!!!!!!!!!!!! ahh the irony!!!

<eliserh> I agree completely, except...

<haze> for one thing, there are no links.

<eliserh> and it's SCHENCK v. U.S., not Shenk.

<haze> and Schenck doesn't say anything about private websites.

<eliserh> oh yeah, and Schenck is decades out of date, anyway.

<Excalibre> and your spelling makes my eyes bleed.

<eliserh> works like these usually go in a daylog. if you do that, i guarantee the censors will leave you alone. they're flexible like that.

August 26, 2005

(thing) by whinge'n'wank (2 yr) (print) Reputation -103(+3/-106) Sun August 26 2005 at 12:31:15

im putting this in one of these daylog things to allude the censorship board here cause they dont like having a real leftist intelectual like me to counter there fascist system. these people r whats wrong with this KKKountry. they think they hate us cause were wonderful and dont even know that the americans are terrorist bullies. you people just arent ready to hear real liberal views cause yer too busy reading President George W. Bush's address to the nation: September 07, 2003.

Face it you people dont wanna hear about ANYTHING you dont understand. You try to shut me up when i talk about the best places to get handjobs and how my roommate who might be gay likes to DO IT, but we both know the truth dont we? YOU WANT ME TO GO AWAY CAUSE I KNOW AND YOU KNOW I KNOW AND I KNOW YOU KNOW I KNOW, BUT NO! I know you wanna DO IT with my maybegay roommate, because I HAVE SEEN THE HANDJOB IN YOUR SOULS!!!!!

Im sure it will be a geisha dawn before u come to your senses and realize that your driving away the best "noder" thats ever come here. i coulda been the next DMan and help you learn about the secret sadomasochistic rituals u have to do to join the Federalist Society or the GOP cause that is some cracked out shit i can tell you, except now I WON'T tell you! HA HA HA! Cause your off my list now! You wont have me to kick around anymore! Screw you guys! Im going to wikipedia! i dont care what you all think cause your punctuation and merit doesnt impress me. Im self actualized and love myself more than my roommate loves DOING IT and if you think my stuff is crap then you have no one to blame but yourself cause you're the inspiration for my "crap!"

And dont even say i dont know what im talkin about or try to claim i dont cite my sources, See, e.g., Dang v. UNUM Life Ins. Co., 175 F.3d 1186, 1189 (10th Cir. 1999), Harris v. U.S., 2003 D.C. App. LEXIS 623,*;834 A.2d 106 (2003), Doe v. Moe, 827 N.E.2d 240 (Mass. Ct. App. 2005),Birmingham-Jefferson Civic Center Authority v. City of Birmingham, ___ So.2d ___, 2005 WL 1023157 (Ala. 2005) (Parker, J.), Bright v. Westmoreland County, 380 F.3d 729 (3rd Cir. 2004), not to mention McConnell v. FEC, (" STEVENS and O.CONNOR, JJ., delivered the opinion of the Court with respect to BCRA Titles I and II, in which SOUTER, GINSBURG, and BREYER, JJ., joined. REHNQUIST, C. J., delivered the opinion of the Court with respect to BCRA Titles III and IV, in which O.CONNOR, SCALIA, KENNEDY, and SOUTER, JJ., joined, in which STEVENS, GINSBURG, and BREYER, JJ., joined except with respect to BCRA §§305, and in which THOMAS, J., joined with respect to BCRA §§§§304, 305, 307, 316, 319, and 403(b). BREYER, J., delivered the opinion of the Court with respect to BCRA Title V, in which STEVENS, O.CONNOR, SOUTER, and GINSBURG, JJ., joined. SCALIA, J., filed an opinion concurring with respect to BCRA Titles III and IV, dissenting with respect to BCRA Titles I and V, and concurring in the judgment in part and dissenting in part with respect to BCRA Title II. THOMAS, J., filed an opinion concurring with respect to BCRA Titles III and IV, except for BCRA §§§§311 and 318, concurring in the result with respect to BCRA §§318, concurring in the judgment in part and dissenting in part with respect to BCRA Title II, and dissenting with respect to BCRA Titles I, V, and §§311, in which opinion SCALIA, J., joined as to Parts I, II.A, and II.B. KENNEDY, J., filed an opinion concurring in the judgment in part and dissenting in part with respect to BCRA Titles I and II, in which REHNQUIST, C. J.,joined, in which SCALIA, J., joined except to the extent the opinion upholds new FECA §§323(e) and BCRA §§202, and in which THOMAS, J., joined with respect to BCRA §§213. REHNQUIST, C. J., filed an opinion dissenting with respect to BCRA Titles I and V, in which SCALIA and KENNEDY, JJ., joined. STEVENS, J., filed an opinion dissenting with respect to BCRA §§305, in which GINSBURG and BREYER, JJ., joined.")

This sucks so bad I had to custom-make a softlink to do it justice wanker