Call me senator.

smackaholic · Post by **smackaholic** » Fri Jun 19, 2009 5:52 pm

What a petty miserable cunt, uhhhh, I mean Senator Cunt.

He was following normal protocol. Senator or Ma'am is absolutely proper. Infact, ma'am actually is normal as it is shorter and less clumsy sounding.

BTW, I would come to the exact same conclusion if that stupid cunt was a republican. This has nothing to do with politics. It is about being a decent civil human being. If that stupid cunt felt she was being slighted, she could have waited til a break and said, general, how 'bout calling me senator?

Just interested in hearing the libs defend this one. I'd like to particularly hear from vet libs like terry. You know goddamn well he was following normal protocol.

This fukking miserable cunt was just doing what miserable lib cunts do, showing disdain for the military.

I think she just might regret this pompous bullshit come election time. Or is Cali so solidly antimilitary libtard that it won't matter.

Cosmo Kramer · Post by **Cosmo Kramer** » Fri Jun 19, 2009 5:56 pm

She worked hard to get that title and now it doesn't mean shit!!! What a fucking Bitch!!!! She should be ashamed of herself for speaking that way to a member of our Armed Forces who fights to give her the privilege to run for senator....SHAME ON YOU CUNT!!!!!

Mikey · Post by **Mikey** » Fri Jun 19, 2009 6:02 pm

At least he didn't call her Mr. Tibbs.

socal · Post by **socal** » Fri Jun 19, 2009 6:10 pm

Senator or ma'am are both correct. She prefers senator. He obliged. Non-issue.

Mountain out of molehills, smeltoholic. Unbunch your panties and move on.

indyfrisco · Post by **indyfrisco** » Fri Jun 19, 2009 6:10 pm

+1 in the cunt category.

Sirfindafold · Post by **Sirfindafold** » Fri Jun 19, 2009 6:11 pm

maybe she was riding the cotton pony.

Terry in Crapchester · Fri Jun 19, 2009 6:22 pm

Sirfindafold wrote:maybe she was riding the cotton pony.

http://boxer.senate.gov/about/bio/

Doesn't state her age but does state that she's been married since 1962 and is a grandmother. I'll go out on a limb just a tad and say that's highly unlikely.

smackaholic wrote:I'd like to particularly hear from vet libs like terry.

What do I think about this? I think that I probably never would've heard about it at all, but for the fact that somebody on this board was waiting with baited breath for something like this to happen.

Oh, and socal has it right.

JMak · Post by **JMak** » Fri Jun 19, 2009 6:23 pm

^^^psycho much?

Was it that important to verify sff's suggestion?

Terry in Crapchester · Fri Jun 19, 2009 6:25 pm

Psycho much, because I looked up her official biography? :?

JMak · Post by **JMak** » Fri Jun 19, 2009 6:29 pm

Terry in Crapchester wrote:Psycho much, because I looked up her official biography? :?

I read sff's comment, chuckled, and then moved on. I wasn't motivated to search for her online bio to determine whether it's possible she could be on the rag or not. Maybe I was a little overdramatic by characterizing that as "psycho"...but certainly seemed weird.

Just sayin'. No need to get cunty about it.

indyfrisco · Post by **indyfrisco** » Fri Jun 19, 2009 6:32 pm

JMak wrote:Maybe I was a little overdramatic by characterizing that as "psycho"...but certainly seemed weird.

Not at all. Terry will go to the far depths of the Earth to pardon any liberal of wrongdoings.

PSUFAN · Post by **PSUFAN** » Fri Jun 19, 2009 6:44 pm

He should have thrown his shoes at her...I doubt she has the moves that TheBrushClearer in Chief showed.

smackaholic · Post by **smackaholic** » Fri Jun 19, 2009 6:51 pm

Is she from the bay area? She might be a brush clearer herself.

PSUFAN · Post by **PSUFAN** » Fri Jun 19, 2009 6:53 pm

You just made me spit up the dried herring I was gnawing on.

smackaholic · Post by **smackaholic** » Fri Jun 19, 2009 6:57 pm

Terry in Crapchester wrote: What do I think about this? I think that I probably never would've heard about it at all, but for the fact that somebody on this board was waiting with baited breath for something like this to happen.

Oh, and socal has it right.

Figures that would be your response.

You don't think she looks the least bit petty telling the general to call her senator when ma'am is a normal accepted alternative?

This was nothing more than an insecure petty bitch reminding somebody who was in charge there. If you can't see that, you're as a dumb a cunt as she.

indyfrisco · Post by **indyfrisco** » Fri Jun 19, 2009 6:57 pm

PSUFAN wrote:You just made me spit up the dried herring I was gnawing on.

That's what you get for eating dried herring. :throw-up smiley: x infinity

Smackie Chan · Post by **Smackie Chan** » Fri Jun 19, 2009 7:07 pm

After reviewing the play, a double technical is assessed. Boxer was cunty for objecting to being called "ma'am," and suxawholedik was cunty for posting a thread about it.

There - everybody happy?

Van · Post by **Van** » Fri Jun 19, 2009 7:08 pm

He shoulda called her "sugar tits."

BSmack · Post by **BSmack** » Fri Jun 19, 2009 9:12 pm

The only people who will ever give a shit about this are the same folks who never would have voted for Boxer in the first place.

Sirfindafold · Post by **Sirfindafold** » Fri Jun 19, 2009 9:22 pm

BSmack wrote:The only people who will ever give a shit about this are the same folks who never would have voted for Boxer in the first place.

So in your mind, what does that say about the people who voted for her?

Bennish · Post by **Bennish** » Fri Jun 19, 2009 9:23 pm

All women are cunts and whores.

Wolfman · Post by **Wolfman** » Fri Jun 19, 2009 9:35 pm

The only people who will ever give a shit about this are the same folks who never would have voted for Boxer in the first place.
So sadly true. The folks who vote for her are brain dead.

BSmack · Post by **BSmack** » Fri Jun 19, 2009 9:38 pm

Sirfindafold wrote:
BSmack wrote:The only people who will ever give a shit about this are the same folks who never would have voted for Boxer in the first place.
So in your mind, what does that say about the people who voted for her?

It says they agree with her policies more often than not. I know damn well each party has its share of pretentious blowhards.

OCmike · Post by **OCmike** » Fri Jun 19, 2009 9:44 pm

Smackaholic, Boxer keeps getting re-elected not because she's a Dem, but because the CA GOP leadetship inexplicably makes their candidate a mega-rich, assault rifle-loving, self-righteous bible thumper. If they'd get a reasonably moderate Republican on the ballot, they'd destroy Boxer in November, red state or not.

The Dems can't stand her either, as she's a know-nothing blowhard with a brutal insecurity streak. But they don't pit her against a worthy primary opponent because she's got seniority and she beats the GOP's Charlton Heston-Pat Bichanon hybrid every fukken time.

No one here will say jack shit about it, as we're all pretty well used to Boxer embarrassing the shit out of us on a regular basis.

Wolfman · Post by **Wolfman** » Fri Jun 19, 2009 9:59 pm

like I said--brain dead ! Thanks for verifying it.

Van · Post by **Van** » Fri Jun 19, 2009 10:01 pm

Screw_Michigan wrote:
RACK Bennish!

Who 'dat?

OCmike · Post by **OCmike** » Sat Jun 20, 2009 12:26 am

BSmack wrote:
Sirfindafold wrote:
BSmack wrote:The only people who will ever give a shit about this are the same folks who never would have voted for Boxer in the first place.
So in your mind, what does that say about the people who voted for her?
It says they agree with her policies more often than not. I know damn well each party has its share of pretentious blowhards.

BWA!

Here's Boxer's policies:

Do whatever is necessary to appear more important than Diane Feinstein. /end of list

Can you think of anything she's done in more than a decade in the senate? Me neither. She's the insecure wife of some rich dude who felt like a Maury-watching loser. So she pretty much ran for office to give herself a sense of worth. Problem is, she's overshadowed by Feinstein, who is respected by the vast majority of californians. Sure, she's got plenty of lib-loony ideas, but she conducts herself in a way that she thinks best represents the state's and her constituents views.

mvscal calls me a braindead douchebag and insists that everyone hates DF in 3...2...

poptart · Post by **poptart** » Sat Jun 20, 2009 12:15 pm

"What's my name!
SAY MY NAME BITCH!!"

"Uh...
SENATOR BOXER!!
SENATOR BOXER!!
OH GOD!"

War Wagon · Post by **War Wagon** » Sat Jun 20, 2009 3:09 pm

PSUFAN wrote:He should have thrown his shoes at her...I doubt she has the moves that TheBrushClearer in Chief showed.

I doubt a general in full uniform is wearing sandals, though I wouldn't have minded had he smacked her upside the head with a boot.

BSmack · Post by **BSmack** » Sat Jun 20, 2009 4:45 pm

OCmike wrote:BWA!

Here's Boxer's policies:

Do whatever is necessary to appear more important than Diane Feinstein. /end of list

Can you think of anything she's done in more than a decade in the senate?

I don't vote for her seat. You do. If I were a Californian, perhaps I would be more familiar with her record.

trev · Post by **trev** » Sat Jun 20, 2009 4:46 pm

Her hair and glasses are worse than Sarah Palins.

socal · Post by **socal** » Sat Jun 20, 2009 4:59 pm

trev wrote:Her hair and glasses are worse than Sarah Palins.

Perhaps she should seek a RNC wardrobe makeover.

PSUFAN · Post by **PSUFAN** » Sat Jun 20, 2009 5:05 pm

I'd suckle on Palin's man in the canoe until she yelped like a puppy. The thought of that activity with Boxer is what prompted the dried herring comment...

Diogenes · Post by **Diogenes** » Sat Jun 20, 2009 5:20 pm

OCmike wrote:Smackaholic, Boxer keeps getting re-elected not because she's a Dem, but because the CA GOP leadetship inexplicably makes their candidate a mega-rich, assault rifle-loving, self-righteous bible thumper.

Matt Fong? Bill Jones?

The only time she faced an actual conservative was in '92, and she needed a last second smear campaign to get over on Herschenson. Fong was supposed to be the 'electable' moderate candidate (beating out Issa in the primary) and Jones was such a dud he never ran a single TV ad.

And leadetship isn't a word. I don't care, but apparently that's important around here.

trev · Post by **trev** » Sat Jun 20, 2009 7:30 pm

PSUFAN wrote:I'd suckle on Palin's man in the canoe until she yelped like a puppy. The thought of that activity with Boxer is what prompted the dried herring comment...

I'll have to rack that.

Lillian Vernon · Post by **Lillian Vernon** » Sat Jun 20, 2009 7:45 pm

mvscal wrote:
Van wrote:
Screw_Michigan wrote:
RACK Bennish!
Who 'dat?
I believe that is Meltio Fan.

Now how would you know who that is? He claims he has never posted his picture on the boards.

PSUFAN · Post by **PSUFAN** » Sat Jun 20, 2009 8:36 pm

trev wrote:
PSUFAN wrote:I'd suckle on Palin's man in the canoe until she yelped like a puppy. The thought of that activity with Boxer is what prompted the dried herring comment...
I'll have to rack that.

See that, mvscal? BODE, mofo.

Van · Post by **Van** » Sun Jun 21, 2009 1:27 am

Hold up there, PSU. You're playing an entirely different game than the one mvscal runs on trev.

You just wanna chew on Palin's (and, clearly, trev's) clit until you achieve proper MILF squirtage. Nothing wrong with that, not at all. Quite commendable, all in all.

mvscal and trev, that's an altogether different animal. When mvscal darkens trev's back door he shoots for exquisite pain and Stockholm Syndrome style subjugation/humiliation, in his sweet, sweet ministrations.

His only contact with trev's little Charger in the canoe involves copper wiring, highly tensioned alligator clips, a bathtub filled with Mountain Dew, packs of D cells duct taped together and an oft ignored "safe word."

Respect.

Onions · Post by **Onions** » Mon Jun 22, 2009 3:18 am

he should have called her bitch