Charles is mad at being ignored

Charles is involved with a Twitter spat with Joshua Levy who is organizing a march against NSA spying. In a gotcha moment Charles claims that the one of the group attending is the Mansfield North Central Ohio Tea Party. who have  a website called Blood for Patriots. Regardless of how one feels about them as a political organization, they have a right to participate in protests. Charles is using their involvement as an attack on Joshua Levry’s anti-NSA spying rally. Joshua decides to ignore Charles who is not too pleased.

That is what happens when you are irrelant!

Charles then has the audacity to get upset at accusations of smearing.

Charles really has some nerve getting upset at being accused of smearing. His career the last 5 years has been based on smearing people.


61 Comments on “Charles is mad at being ignored”

  1. Pakimon says:

    Also supporting that anti-NSA spying rally is the ACLU and DailyKos.

    Do they realize that Chunkles considers them “gullible leftists”?

    Chunky has become so irrelevant I doubt that they care but it’s hilarious watching the ponytailed emopotamus burn yet more bridges.

    It’s a tough road to travel being a “moderate pragmatist”.

    Or was that “pragmatic moderate”?


    Chunkles is well on his way to being relegated to “fringe paranoid kook” by the Left side of the political spectrum. (The Right side relegated him to “fringe paranoid kook” status years ago) 😆

  2. Minnow says:

    Barry, you are such an amateur.

  3. Minnow says:

    Take it to the bridge Barry…. surf’s up Barry…

  4. Kurt's skid mark detection device says:

    Charles does lots of smearing

    there are fecal smears on every chair in his apartment

  5. Octopus says:

    Sounds like somebody’s getting his fat ass kicked, again. Hey, Chunky…stop bending over, if you don’t like it.

  6. Octopus says:

    Rest Of The World’s Treatment Of Chunky:
    Pause to laugh, and crush him like a bug.

    Diary Of Daedalus’ Treatment Of Our Chunky:
    Much love and appreciation. 🙂
    Shared memories of days gone by.

  7. More of the real fear of being to late to be gone on time.

  8. Octopus says:

    A really well-written essay on why liberals suck and must stfu:

    Dear Liberal…Here’s Why I’m So Hostile

    by Jeremy N. Choate

    This essay is a bit of departure from my usually reasonable and logical approach to important issues. That’s not to say that the essay isn’t well-reasoned and is bereft of logical argumentation, but I freely admit that it’s polemical, in nature. Sometimes you’re just pissed, and you need to vent. Here’s my vent…

    Lately, I must admit that my hostility towards your political ilk has ramped up, pretty dramatically. No, it’s not because we, at this point in my life, have a half-black president in the White House, and I’m some closet racist who is becoming increasingly frustrated at the prospects of the White Man’s power slipping through my fingers. I know that you’ve accused our side of such nonsense, and the thought keeps you warm at night, but I can assure you that it is a comfortable fiction of which you should probably divest yourself.

    Now before I waste too much of your time, let’s establish who I’m talking to. If you believe that we live in an evil, imperialist nation from its founding, and you believe that it should be “fundamentally transformed”, lend me your ears. If you believe that the free market is the source of the vast majority of society’s ills and wish to have more government intervention into it, I’m talking to you. If you believe that health care is a basic human right and that government should provide it to everyone, you’re the guy I’m screaming at. If you think minorities cannot possibly survive in this inherently racist country without handouts and government mandated diversity quotas, you’re my guy. If you believe that rich people are that way because they’ve exploited their workers and acquired wealth on the backs of the poor, keep reading. Pretty much, if you trust government more than your fellow American, this post is for you.

    First of all, let me say that we probably agree on more things than you think. Even between Tea Party Patriots and Occupy Wall-Streeters, I’ve observed a common hatred of the insidious alliance between big business and big government. As Representative Paul Ryan (R-WI) so correctly noted, government should never be in the business of picking winners and losers in corporate America, and no person, organization, union, or corporation should have their own key to the back door of our government.

    Second, contrary to popular belief, conservatives really are concerned with the plight of the poor in this nation. You accuse us of being uncompassionate, hateful, racist, and greedy, but studies have shown that when it comes to charitable giving, conservatives are at least (if not more, depending on the study you read) as generous as liberals in caring for the poor. The difference between us is not in our attitude towards the problem — it’s our attitude towards the solution. We believe that the government does practically nothing well (since without competition or a profit motive there is no incentive to do well) and has made the plight of the poor far worse than it would have ever been had government never gotten involved. For a stark example of this, look no farther than the condition of the black family in America since the “War on Poverty” began. You believe that more government is the answer, and that if we only throw more money at the problem, the problem will go away. We believe, as Reagan so aptly stated,

    Government is not the solution to our problems; government is the problem.

    Third, as people who might actually have to avail ourselves of a doctor’s services at some point in our lives, we are just as concerned with the condition of America’s healthcare system as you are. While we believe that America has the world’s most capable physicians, has the world’s most innovative pharmaceutical industry, and is on the cutting edge of medical technology, we also understand that the delivery system is far from perfect. However, unlike you, we see a grave danger in turning the administration of that delivery system over to the same entity that is responsible for giving us the United States Postal Service. There are private sector solutions that should certainly be explored before we kill the system, altogether, by giving it to the government to run.

    Now that we’ve touched on a couple of points of common ground, allow me to explain my aggressiveness towards your efforts to implement your progressive agenda. First, let’s talk about the word “progressive”, since you now seem to prefer that word to “liberal”. In order to label something as progressive or regressive, one must have some idea as to what constitutes progress. What is the ideal towards which you are striving? An idea is considered progressive if it moves us closer to the ideal and regressive if it moves us further away. So, what is your ideal society?

    Though I can’t begin to discern the thoughts of every liberal who may read this, nor can I assume that every liberal has the same notion of an ideal society, in my arguments with liberals over the years, I couldn’t help but notice the influence that FDR’s Second Bill of Rights has had in shaping the beliefs of the modern liberal with regards to domestic policy. The rights that FDR cited are:

    The right to a useful and remunerative job in the industries or shops or farms or mines of the nation;
    The right to earn enough to provide adequate food and clothing and recreation;
    The right of every farmer to raise and sell his products at a return which will give him and his family a decent living;
    The right of every businessman, large and small, to trade in an atmosphere of freedom from unfair competition and domination by monopolies at home or abroad;
    The right of every family to a decent home;
    The right to adequate medical care and the opportunity to achieve and enjoy good health;
    The right to adequate protection from the economic fears of old age, sickness, accident, and unemployment;
    The right to a good education.
    At this point, you’re probably screaming, “Right on!!”, and who can blame you? What sane person in the world doesn’t want everyone to be gainfully employed, adequately fed, smartly clothed, appropriately sheltered, and properly educated? These are the goals of every moral society on the planet, however we cannot ignore the fundamental question of, “At what cost?”

    I’m not sure whether FDR was a shallow thinker or simply a shrewd, Machiavellian politician, but the fact that he framed each of these ideals as a human right should be troubling to every freedom-loving person in America. After all, what does it mean for something to be a human right? Doesn’t it mean that it’s something to which you are entitled simply by virtue of your being human? Let’s think about some of the basic rights that the real Bill of Rights delineates: freedom of speech, freedom of religion, freedom to petition the government, freedom to bear arms, freedom from illegal search and seizure, etc.

    If you’re moderately intelligent and intellectually honest, you’ll quickly see what separates the rights laid out in the real Bill of Rights from those laid out in FDR’s misguided list — none of the rights listed above require the time, treasure, or talents of another human being. Your right to speak requires nothing from anyone else. Your right to practice your religion requires nothing from any of your fellow citizens. Your right to bear arms means that you are allowed to possess weapons to defend yourself and your family, but it makes no demand that a weapon be provided to you by anyone. A true human right is one that you possess, even if you’re the only person on the entire planet — and it is unconditional.

    FDR’s list is no “Bill of Rights”. It’s a list of demands. If I have a right to a job, doesn’t that mean that one must be provided to me? If I have a right to adequate food, clothing, and recreation, doesn’t that mean that I am entitled to those things, and someone should provide them to me? If I have an inherent right to a decent home, once again, doesn’t that mean it should be provided to me, regardless of my ability to afford one or build one for myself?

    You might protest that FDR only meant that we have the right to pursue those things, but that’s not what he said, and why would he? If we live in a free society, our right to pursue those things is self-evident, is it not? Besides, if he only believed in our right to pursue those things, he would not have felt the need to implement the New Deal.

    You may be getting anxious, now, wondering what FDR’s Second Bill of Rights has to do with my antipathy towards your political philosophy. It’s quite simple — your political beliefs are a threat to liberty — not just for me, but for my three boys and their children as well. I care much less about the America that I’m living in at this very moment than I do about the one that I’m leaving Nathaniel, Charlie, and Jackson.

    How does your political bent threaten my and my sons personal liberty, you ask? In your irrational attempt to classify things such as clothing, shelter, health care, employment, and income as basic human rights, you are placing a demand upon my time, my treasure, and my talents. If you believe that you have a right to health care, and you are successful in persuading enough shallow thinkers to think as you do, then it will place a demand upon me to provide it to you. If you believe that you have a right to a job, and more than half of America agrees with you, as a business owner, I am obligated to provide one to you, even if it means making my business less profitable.

    The fact is, you can rail against my conservatism all you wish. You can make fun of my Tea Party gatherings, and you can ridicule patriots in tri-corner hats until you wet yourself from mirth, but one thing is for certain: my political philosophy will NEVER be a threat to your freedom. If you feel a burning responsibility to the poor, conservatism will never prevent you from working 80 hours per week and donating all of your income to charity. If you feel a strong sense of pity for a family who cannot afford health insurance, my political philosophy will never prevent you from purchasing health insurance for this family or raising money to do so, if you cannot afford it, personally. If you are moved with compassion for a family who is homeless, a conservative will never use the police power of government to prevent you from taking that family in to your own home or mobilizing your community to build one for them.

    However, you cannot say the same for liberalism. If I choose not to give to the poor for whatever reason, you won’t simply try to persuade me on the merits of the idea — you will seek to use the government as an instrument of plunder to force me to give to the poor. If we are walking down the street together and we spot a homeless person, using this logic, you would not simply be content with giving him $20 from your own pocket — you would hold a gun to my head and force me to give him $20, as well.

    Everything that modern liberalism accomplishes is accomplished at the barrel of a government rifle. You do not trust in the generosity of the American people to provide, through private charity, things such as clothing, food, shelter, and health care, so you empower the government to take from them and spend the money on wasteful, inefficient, and inadequate government entitlement programs. You do not trust in the personal responsibility of the average American to wield firearms in defense of themselves and their families, so you seek to empower the government to criminalize the use and possession of firearms by private citizens. Everytime you empower the government, you lose more of your personal liberty — it’s an axiomatic truth.

    What angers me the most about you is the eagerness with which you allow the incremental enslavement to occur. You are the cliched and proverbial frog in the pot who has actually convinced himself that he’s discovered a big, silver jacuzzi. Somehow, you’re naive enough to believe that one more degree of heat won’t really matter that much.

    I have the utmost respect for a slave who is continuously seeking a path to freedom. What I cannot stomach is a free man who is continuous seeking a path to servitude by willingly trading his freedom for the false sense of security that government will provide.

    I am reminded of Samuel Adams’ impassioned speech where he stated:

    “If ye love wealth (or security) better than liberty, the tranquillity of servitude than the animating contest of freedom, — go from us in peace. We ask not your counsels or arms. Crouch down and lick the hands which feed you. May your chains sit lightly upon you, and may posterity forget that ye were our countrymen!”

    Servitude can exist in a free society, but freedom cannot exist in a slave nation. In a free country, you have the liberty to join with others of your political ilk and realize whatever collectivist ideals you can dream up. You can start your own little commune where the sign at the front gate says, “From each according to his ability; to each according to his need”, and everyone can work for the mutual benefit of everyone else. In my society, you have the freedom to do that.

    In your society, I don’t have the same freedom. If your collectivism offends me, I am not free to start my own free society within its borders. In order for collectivism to work, everyone must be on board, even those who oppose it — why do you think there was a Berlin Wall?

    In conclusion, just know that the harder you push to enact your agenda, the more hostile I will become — the harder I will fight you. It’s nothing personal, necessarily. If you want to become a slave to an all-powerful central government, be my guest. But if you are planning to take me and my family down with you, as we say down here in the South, I will stomp a mud-hole in your chest and walk it dry.

    Bring it.

  9. Octopus says:

    I don’t appreciate the implication that I was “smearing” anyone.

    He doesn’t “a-priest-he-ate” the “imp-leh-season” that he was “s’moring” “an onion.”

  10. Doppel B. DeMilyo says:

    Charles is reduced to picking slap fights with other people nobody ever heard of. ( and losing as usual)

    It’s starting to dawn on him how he’s on the wrong side of the NSA issue. Both in terms of being right but also being with the cool kids.
    Expect his hysterical flailings to intensify.

  11. Doppel B. DeMilyo says:

    I hope this makes chucks head explode

    • gizbot7 says:

      I hate that I agree with darn near all of those people, including the douchebags. However, the Nixon comparison was stupid and incorrect but not surprising.

  12. dwells38 says:

    Chunk and his minions thinks that a mocking interview on the Daily Show
    is crack journalism.
    The interviewer is very funny. And yes, they made the Republican look foolish and then claim he’s a flagrant racist. I watched the interview and he’s not racist, just foolish. A product of his upbringing. He wants to beat the Dems and he admitted voter registration might give the Repubs an advantage because so many Dems are young, misinformed, lazy and stupid which is true. But vote Dem as a habit. And he admitted he was picturing stupid young white brotards and blacks (hence the racism attack – but note he also called whites stupid). Is there any doubt he likes conservative blacks who vote GOP? Nope. Of course these days you’re racist if you criticize a black communist. Which brings me to the next point.

    Sure the Repub in this video sounds foolish. But the OTHER side, held by civil rights activist John Lewis sounds equally unhinged. He says today racism permeates EVERY SINGLE CORNER OF SOCIETY?

    Really? Where the fuck does he live? I’d like to see him getting his ass beat going to the Post office, the grocery, at stop lights. Right, that doesn’t happen to him. Or is he talking about black teens beating the fuck out of whites and often killing them. Like the couple dragged from their car the other day and hospitalzied. Or the elderly veteran murdered by two maurauding black thugs. Or the young soldier stabbed and murdered by a black thug a couple weeks ago? Gee I doubt that. He’s merely projecting his hatred of whites onto walkaday unassuming whites which have no problem with normal peaceful, productive and thinking black people. But that’s OK. He comes from an era where he assumes whites hate him and you can’t always teach an old dog new tricks.
    Another thing is John Lewis is a socialist at least, if not a communist: Per Wikipedia –

    Socialist associations
    Bayard Rustin, Andrew Young, William Fitts Ryan, James Farmer, John Lewis
    Lewis’ civil rights activism brought him into contact with some of the leading leftists of the era, including Bayard Rustin, Andrew Young, William Fitts Ryan and James Farmer.
    Communist Party paper contribution
    John Lewis contributed an article to the Communist Party USA paper People’s Weekly World, August 23,2003, page 8 “An Open letter to my Colleagues in Congress: Remembering the Legacy of Martin Luther King”

    Still, in my book John Lewis gets a pass. If I were a black growing up in the first half of the 20th century I too might toy with the idea that a communist society might be better for ME and other blacks. Not for necessarily for society as a whole.
    But here’s my real point. Chunk Johnson of LGF knows better. He’s traveled the world as a musician and he at one time pretended at least to understand that, although Capitalism isn’t perfect, it’s WAY better than the alternatives which require by definition to restrict freedoms and the pursuit of happiness.

    Let’s just get it out in the open and say that Chunk didn’t just part with the right in ‘09. He joined the Commies! Enthusiastically He hasn’t denied it and never has an issue with the Communist proggy agenda. He purveys their lies whenever possible and distorts good people’s intentions and smears them daily for the express purpose of shutting down free expression and furthering the Communist agenda. He professes to hate everything about American traditional values of freedom, especially religious freedom and faith and promotes anyone who tears free Americans down. But he bizarrely supports the government’s ham-fisted infringements on our rights such as NSA spying and IRS political thuggishness. Let’s face it, if they instituted gulags and purges of the political right tomorrow this fat fuck would be so onboard it’d be the fastest he’d moved in a decade and they’d probably have to administer defibrillation.

  13. Because 1-800-MILYO says:

    Attention BRC. Attention BRC. Correlator tool may provide interesting information about trannyboys and other things attached to site.

    That it all.

  14. dwells38 says:

    As you may’ve noticed Chunk’s most frequent guest poster is a prolific proggy commie puke named Randall Gross. Here’s a recent post on his website:

    No Randy, we on the right don’t hate those admirable goals. We just can’t help noticing that you want to achieve these things while giving a pass to Islam which CAUSES them all over the world. You can’t be a PC dipshit like you are and make any real impact on these issues. You can send vaccines to Pakistan but the volunteers get murdered. You can open schools in Somalia but the little girls and their teachers get murdered and raped. You can preach peace in Egypt but they’re still going to rape western journalists and attack the preaceful Christians. You can try and overturn a dictator in Syria but then you’re just backing violent Jihadists that murder for Allah and even turn on their fellows freedom (ha!) fighters. You can talk about women’s rights in Saudi Arabia but they still beat their wives for driving a car.

    Isn’t it ironic and depressing that such a useless, mindless puke is LGF’s main contributor now?

    • Octopus says:

      We knew it was coming, the inevitable fingering of the GOP as the archsupervillains of the flopzilla, but it’s still hilariously sick-making to watch them do it.

  15. dwells38 says:

    Chunk’s Vicious Baboon is vindictively and sadistically happy that a black, low paid ACA phone rep got fired for telling the truth about the Obumblercare unuseable website in a call from Shawn Hannity.

    Vicious Babushka
    ACA Hotline Operator Takes Call From Hannity; Gets Righteously Sacked; Wingnuts Enraged

    1 hour ago
    Views: 127 • Comments: 1
    Tweets: 10 • Rating: 0

    Of course, this immediately happened:
    And use his massive audience to help her get a new job where she doesn’t have to lie and purvey communist propaganda.
    The Baboon rages in her post about how this person should’ve never taken a call from the media, should’ve bumped it up to the next party official, etc. Nice Baboon. You don’t think she deserved a pass given the fucking site REALLY IS USELESS. And she’s only been on the job for 2 weeks. Baboon posted it an hour ago but fails to mention Hannity’s generosity which is yesterday’s news. Lying, hateful commies have to stick to the narrative doncha know.

    • dwells38 says:

      Of course it’s highly possible the Chunk’s Baboon just hates both blacks and Irish people.

    • dwells38 says:

      Also note: the Vicious Baboon is happy that the Obumblercare Commie apparatchiks fired the innocent lady despite that she was never trained to NOT talk to the media. So first they Obumble her training. Then fire HER for their own Obumble.

      In true Soviet/People’s republic Obumble fashion. It’s the future of Amerika under these hateful pigs.

    • Because 1-800-MILYO says:

      I don’t think “righteously” means what granny thinks it means.

  16. Voltaire's Crack says:

    Interesting Times
    10/24/2013 5:13:15 pm PDT

    Slow metabolism ‘obesity excuse’ true

    Some had mutated versions of KSR2.

    It had a twin effect of increasing their appetite while their slowing metabolism.

    “You would be hungry and wanting to eat a lot, you would not want to move because of a slower metabolism and would probably also develop type 2 diabetes at a young age,” lead researcher Prof Sadaf Farooqi told the BBC.

    She added: “It slows the ability to burn calories and that’s important as it’s a new explanation for obesity.”

    As soon as I saw the headline, I couldn’t help but be reminded of one of LGF’s sadder flounces… :-/

    Is that a reference to you-know-who?

  17. dwells38 says:

    OMG! OMG! OMG! OMG! OMG! OMG! OMG! OMG! OMG! Global Kittens!!!!
    According to HuffPo and posted on LGF pages: OMG!
    Uh…I mean:
    That’s right. The Arctic is melting!!!! We’re talkin’ Wicked Witch kinda meltdown here. It was way cooler 44,000 years ago.
    Oh wait

    The last glacial period, popularly known as the Ice Age, was the most recent glacial period within the current ice age occurring during the last years of the Pleistocene, from approximately 110,000 to 10,000 years ago.[1]

  18. dwells38 says:

    Because Chunkles would never smear. He’s a progressive, after all.

  19. Because Remember to cc EVERYBODY says:

    • dwells38 says:

      Memo from the offices of Little Green Footballs (aka Chunky’s hall toilet):
      Sent to: My former friends and colleagues
      cc: Any other sane people
      bcc: left-wingers I want to suck up to now

      Dear Sirs. Please be apprised that I have decided that being “classically liberal” is just not liberal enough. So I hereby now become a batshit crazy ass-winded progressive Che Guevara shirt wearing Chicom wannabe God and America hating commie socialist lying puke. Pass it on.

      PS: The GOP are off the rails
      PSS: Sarah Palin’s not that hot
      PSSS: I never said St. Pancake
      PSSSS: Unless you can prove it even though I deleted.
      PSSSSS: Oh you did prove it. Well then I forgot I said it and forgot I deleted it.

    • iSpeakJive says:

      Short version:

      Once upon a time he was an Anti-Idiotarian.
      Now he’s just an Idiotarian.

    • Octopus says:

      The fact they have no earthly-notion who you are is not indicative of their failure to receive a memo that was never sent, because nobody gives a poop.

  20. Juan Epstein says:

    Hispanics are not Asians.

  21. Octopus says:

    😆 (what else is there to do?)

  22. Octopus says:

    Hey, Fatass…how about Obamacare’s War On Women? Any official line on that one, from your Media Matters masters?

  23. Because How about the inside story of the Ocare website FUBAR? says:

  24. Because Damn those Koch Lawyers!!! says:

  25. Because you've got so much at stake in the banking system says:

    • Because 1-800-MILYO says:

      Oh, and I don’t think “audit” means whet you think it means, Chunks.

    • dwells38 says:

      Because, you know Chunky’s an expert on the central banking system. Not like those Pauls and their crazy talk. Such as this lunatic raving from Ron Paul exactly two years ago:

      In many respects the governors of the Federal Reserve System and the members of the Federal Open Market Committee are like all other high-ranking powerful officials. Because they make decisions that profoundly affect the workings of the economy and because they have hundreds of bright economists working for them doing research and collecting data, they buy into the pretense of knowledge—the illusion that because they have all these resources at their fingertips they therefore have the ability to guide the economy as they see fit.

      Nothing could be further from the truth. No attitude could be more destructive. What the Austrian economists Ludwig von Mises and Friedrich von Hayek victoriously asserted in the socialist calculation debate of the 1920s and 1930s—the notion that the marketplace, where people freely decide what they need and want to pay for, is the only effective way to allocate resources—may be obvious to many ordinary Americans. But it has not influenced government leaders today, who do not seem to see the importance of prices to the functioning of a market economy.

      The manner of thinking of the Federal Reserve now is no different than that of the former Soviet Union, which employed hundreds of thousands of people to perform research and provide calculations in an attempt to mimic the price system of the West’s (relatively) free markets. Despite the obvious lesson to be drawn from the Soviet collapse, the U.S. still has not fully absorbed it.

      The Fed fails to grasp that an interest rate is a price—the price of time—and that attempting to manipulate that price is as destructive as any other government price control. It fails to see that the price of housing was artificially inflated through the Fed’s monetary pumping during the early 2000s, and that the only way to restore soundness to the housing sector is to allow prices to return to sustainable market levels. Instead, the Fed’s actions have had one aim—to keep prices elevated at bubble levels—thus ensuring that bad debt remains on the books and failing firms remain in business, albatrosses around the market’s neck.
      The Fed’s quantitative easing programs increased the national debt by trillions of dollars. The debt is now so large that if the central bank begins to move away from its zero interest-rate policy, the rise in interest rates will result in the U.S. government having to pay hundreds of billions of dollars in additional interest on the national debt each year. Thus there is significant political pressure being placed on the Fed to keep interest rates low. The Fed has painted itself so far into a corner now that even if it wanted to raise interest rates, as a practical matter it might not be able to do so. But it will do something, we know, because the pressure to “just do something” often outweighs all other considerations.

      What exactly the Fed will do is anyone’s guess, and it is no surprise that markets continue to founder as anticipation mounts. If the Fed would stop intervening and distorting the market, and would allow the functioning of a truly free market that deals with profit and loss, our economy could recover. The continued existence of an organization that can create trillions of dollars out of thin air to purchase financial assets and prop up a fundamentally insolvent banking system is a black mark on an economy that professes to be free.

  26. Because 1-800-MILYO says:

  27. CroMagnon says:

    In yesterdays post “GOP Clown Show: Rep. Joe Barton Freaks Out Over an HTML Comment” CJ says:

    I tried to find the page containing this code at the site but couldn’t; it looks like it might be an error page resulting from some bad input. Barton’s interns must have really been scouring the code to find anything they could use.

    But the really unbelievable part? The code Barton ranted about is actually just an HTML comment. The quote about “no reasonable expectation of privacy” appears inside comment markers (e.g. “”)

    <!–To continue you must accept …

    You have no reasonable expectation of privacy…

    … for any lawful Government purpose.–>

    This is obviously boilerplate text that was part of a template, and instead of deleting an unnecessary section, whoever coded this page simply commented out the part that did not apply.

    The text does not actually appear anywhere on the site.

    Really, you couldn’t find it, you great investigative LGF Janitor of Love, Science and Cool Web Design techniques? 😆

    Well, it took me less than 2 minutes to find exactly that text in the source code of the page where you arrive after clicking the “Log In” link of heathcare-gov, that is:

    and, there’s no ‘comment markers’ around the text….

    See proof here (and/or try it out yourselves):

    • dwells38 says:

      Well to be fair it IS hard to find things with your eyes closed and your hands over your ears whilst yelling at the top of your lungs: “La La La La La La La La La La La La La La La La….” and so on.

    • OLT's Yet Another Stalker Charles Lie says:

      This needs a post that we can send to ALL of Stalker Charles’ “friends” and the Lefty Loonies who parrot the same lines he reads.

    • Because 1-800-MILYO says:

      It does appear that Chuckles doesn’t quite have that web development tools milyo down. 😆 😆 😆

  28. Octopus says:

    Chunky’s “Fake Benghazi Outrage, A Simple Demonstration Against An Islamophobic Youtube Video That Got A Little Rowdy,” was apparently led by an ex-Gitmo resident and known terrorista. That’s odd.

  29. dwells38 says:

    OK so what’s wrong with this picture:

    Zients:’s problems will be fixed in a month

    Um…didn’t the contractors just say yesterday under oath that they would have wanted months to test the website? Yet, they’re going to have it fixed AND tested in a month? Looks to me like they’re fixing to step all over their dicks again.

    • Because 1-800-MILYO says:

      I don’t think they can fix it in six months. They’ll have to fly a couple of 767s into the whole damn thing and start over. Just watch.

  30. dwells38 says:

    Well at least they’re finally holding someone accountable and firing them….

  31. dwells38 says:

    In other comedy news:


    Chunk “Well All Laugh At This Later” Johnson not available for comment.

  32. Because No, the libertarian obstructionism will continue until you Fascists die says: