I used to use black masking tape to decorate ped-xing signs around San Jose and and LA with walking sticks, top-hats and other accessories. That was 10+ years ago, but always disappointed that I don't see some in these compilation vids.

This gotta be like jumping over five top hats on ice skates.

*promote top hats w/ rats

Dig the Eiffel's new top-hat

Virtually everything political is a choice between the lesser of two evils. That's why I can't stand people who dismiss it and wimp out of the process, claiming that both sides are equally bad. It's a cop out. Everyone has a internal value/judgement system and one side is going to be the slightest bit less-detestable than the other and that's the one you pick. If you don't like it, write someone in.

Too many people treat elections like horse races as if you get some sort of prize for picking a winner. A friend of mine a while back told me that he hadn't picked a winning president in the last 2 elections.

My response: So?

He (supposedly) picked the person he thought would do the best job. It's not a bet on who will win.

Hell even in my utopia I described earlier where private money has successfully been excised from elections and parties are abolished, we're still going to have candidates we don't completely agree with. Nothing is going to change there, but you still pick the one you think will do better or you write someone in.

There are no shining white knights, nor are there villains with furled mustaches and black top hats. Life is hard and complex with countless grey areas, deal with it.

Thank you Jesus!

Chris rewrote his letter with cleaned up language. His reasoning here:

http://blogs.twincities.com/outofbounds/2012/09/08/out-of-bounds-blog-no-8-inquisitive-kitten-pawing-at-yarn/


The letter here (former curse words in all caps):

Dear Emmett C. Burns Jr.,
I find it inconceivable that you are an elected official of the United States government. Your vitriolic hatred and bigotry make me ashamed and disgusted to think that you are in any way responsible for shaping policy at any level. The views you espouse neglect to consider several fundamental key points, which I will outline in great detail (you may want to hire an intern to help you with the longer words):

1. As I suspect you have not read the Constitution, I would like to remind you that the very first, the VERY FIRST Amendment in this founding document deals with the freedom of speech, particularly the abridgment of said freedom. By using your position as an elected official (when referring to your constituents so as to implicitly threaten the Ravens organization) to state that the Ravens should “inhibit such expressions from your employees”, more specifically Brendon Ayanbadejo, not only are you clearly violating the First Amendment, you also come across as a BEAUTIFULLY UNIQUE SPARKLEPONY. What on earth would possess you to be so mind-bogglingly stupid? It baffles me that a man such as yourself, a man who relies on that same First Amendment to pursue your own religious studies without fear of persecution from the state, could somehow justify stifling another person’s right to speech. To call that hypocritical would be to do a disservice to the word. SAD PUPPY DOG EYES hypocritical starts to approach it a little bit.

2. “Many of your fans are opposed to such a view and feel it has no place in a sport that is strictly for pride, entertainment, and excitement.” DISAPPOINTED LEMUR FACE WITH SOLITARY TEAR TRICKLING DOWN TO CHIN. Did you seriously just say that, as someone who’s “deeply involved in government task forces on the legacy of slavery in Maryland”? Have you not heard of Kenny Washington? Jackie Robinson? As recently as 1962 the NFL still had segregation, which was only done away with by brave athletes and coaches daring to speak their mind and do the right thing, and you’re going to say that political views have “no place in a sport”? I can’t even begin to fathom the cognitive dissonance that must be coursing through your rapidly addled mind right now; the mental gymnastics your brain has to tortuously contort itself through to make such a preposterous statement are surely worthy of an Olympic gold medal (the Russian judge gives you a ten for “beautiful oppressionism”).

3. This is more a personal quibble of mine, but why do you hate freedom? Why do you hate the fact that other people want a chance to live their lives and be happy, even though they may believe in something different than you, or act different than you? How does gay marriage, in any way shape or form, affect your life? If gay marriage becomes legal, are you worried that all of a sudden you’ll start thinking about DANCING CHUBTOAD? “ALACK AND ALAS MY TOP HAT HAS FALLEN. Gay marriage just passed. Gotta get me some of that DELICIOUS STATE FAIR HOTDOG!” Will all of your friends suddenly turn gay and refuse to come to your Sunday Ticket grill-outs? (unlikely, gay people enjoy watching football too)
I can assure you that gay people getting married will have zero affect on your life. They won’t come into your house and steal your children. They won’t magically turn you into a lustful FROLICKING OSTRICH. They won’t even overthrow the government in an orgy of hedonistic debauchery because all of a sudden they have the same legal rights as the other 90% of our population, rights like Social Security benefits, child care tax credits, Family and Medical Leave to take care of loved ones, and COBRA healthcare for spouses and children. You know what having these rights will make gays? Full fledged American citizens just like everyone else, with the freedom to pursue happiness and all that entails. Do the civil rights struggles of the past 200 years mean absolutely nothing to you?

In closing, I would like to say that I hope this letter, in some small way, causes you to reflect upon the magnitude of the colossal foot in mouth SLIDE WHISTLE TO E FLAT you so brazenly unleashed on a man whose only crime was speaking out for something he believed in. Best of luck in the next election; I’m fairly certain you might need it.

Sincerely,
Chris Kluwe

p.s. I’ve also been vocal as hell about the issue of gay marriage so you can take your “I know of no other NFL player who has done what Mr. Ayanbadejo is doing” and shove it in your close-minded, totally lacking in empathy piehole and choke on it. UNFORTUNATELY PHALLIC HEDGE SCULPTURE.

Yeah, but the instant you start talk of repealing or restricting the right to own weapons, you put forth an image that you want them unarmed for your own gain.


Oops, meant to reply in the video. Oh well.
In reply to this comment by VoodooV:
>> ^kymbos:

If I was wandering down the street and happened upon a man or two walking with those fucking guns I would shit my pants! Are you serious? The idea that this is ok to do is fucking perverted. Insane.


I'd be ok with armed open carry civilians..if crime really was that rampant. But it's not! We're just not fighting for our lives on a daily basis here. We have a gov't that allows for peaceful change and we vote for a president every four years. These people who casually throw around the idea of "2nd amendment remedies" just haven't really experienced a truly oppressive gov't Oh crap, the price of a latte went up. Time to lock and load fellas!! First world problems.

If I'm just walking along and I see these kids openly carrying, How am I supposed to know that they're going to protect me if some armed robber magically jumps out from the bushes? How do I know these kids aren't the robbers themselves? I'm sorry, we don't live in a world where we can easily identify our protectors with their shining auras and perfect teeth and the bad guys can be identified with their black top hat and their furled mustache.

I'm ok with an armed citizenry. Just not to this degree. It just shows how insecure and paranoid we are.

I just feel the 2nd amendment serves more of a symbolic function than an actual practical one. All it really says is that you have a duty to do something if your gov't truly becomes oppressive. By who's judgement? Again, we have people throwing around the idea of "2nd amendment remedies" whenever a vote doesn't go their way. That's not oppressive gov't people. Come back to me when we actually can't vote anymore. Any successful revolt is going to need large popular support. If you don't have that, then maybe your revolt wasn't meant to succeed.

Here's the thing though, when has the lack of a 2nd amendment ever stopped anyone from overthrowing their gov't if enough people thought it was oppressive throughout history? if an oppressive gov't revokes your right to firearms. Do you just go home and twiddle your thumbs? No, you revolt anyway. Oppressive gov'ts don't just sit around and wait to be overthrown. If they make you an outlaw for having a gun and revolting...so what? being labeled an outlaw never stopped a successful revolt. If they take away your guns...you steal them back. To me it just doesn't seem to make a difference if we have a 2nd amendment or not. A modern military is not going to be deterred by dad's old shotgun. so even if you were allowed only home defense weapons and you needed to revolt. The first thing you do is that you steal some military weapons and/or you find sympathetic members of the military to side with you. if the gov't really has gotten that bad, you'll find entire outfits willing to defect I'd be willing to bet. You're going to need military training for your revolt in any case. 2nd amendment just tells you that you aught to revolt if gov't gets bad. Doesn't say anything about whether or not revolt would be easy. 2nd Amendment or no, ANY revolt is going to be massively bloody.

So hey..maybe we should put down the guns and solve our problems like adults in the 21st century. No one wants a revolution on their hands.

>> ^kymbos:

If I was wandering down the street and happened upon a man or two walking with those fucking guns I would shit my pants! Are you serious? The idea that this is ok to do is fucking perverted. Insane.


I'd be ok with armed open carry civilians..if crime really was that rampant. But it's not! We're just not fighting for our lives on a daily basis here. We have a gov't that allows for peaceful change and we vote for a president every four years. These people who casually throw around the idea of "2nd amendment remedies" just haven't really experienced a truly oppressive gov't Oh crap, the price of a latte went up. Time to lock and load fellas!! First world problems.

If I'm just walking along and I see these kids openly carrying, How am I supposed to know that they're going to protect me if some armed robber magically jumps out from the bushes? How do I know these kids aren't the robbers themselves? I'm sorry, we don't live in a world where we can easily identify our protectors with their shining auras and perfect teeth and the bad guys can be identified with their black top hat and their furled mustache.

I'm ok with an armed citizenry. Just not to this degree. It just shows how insecure and paranoid we are.

I just feel the 2nd amendment serves more of a symbolic function than an actual practical one. All it really says is that you have a duty to do something if your gov't truly becomes oppressive. By who's judgement? Again, we have people throwing around the idea of "2nd amendment remedies" whenever a vote doesn't go their way. That's not oppressive gov't people. Come back to me when we actually can't vote anymore. Any successful revolt is going to need large popular support. If you don't have that, then maybe your revolt wasn't meant to succeed.

Here's the thing though, when has the lack of a 2nd amendment ever stopped anyone from overthrowing their gov't if enough people thought it was oppressive throughout history? if an oppressive gov't revokes your right to firearms. Do you just go home and twiddle your thumbs? No, you revolt anyway. Oppressive gov'ts don't just sit around and wait to be overthrown. If they make you an outlaw for having a gun and revolting...so what? being labeled an outlaw never stopped a successful revolt. If they take away your guns...you steal them back. To me it just doesn't seem to make a difference if we have a 2nd amendment or not. A modern military is not going to be deterred by dad's old shotgun. so even if you were allowed only home defense weapons and you needed to revolt. The first thing you do is that you steal some military weapons and/or you find sympathetic members of the military to side with you. if the gov't really has gotten that bad, you'll find entire outfits willing to defect I'd be willing to bet. You're going to need military training for your revolt in any case. 2nd amendment just tells you that you aught to revolt if gov't gets bad. Doesn't say anything about whether or not revolt would be easy. 2nd Amendment or no, ANY revolt is going to be massively bloody.

So hey..maybe we should put down the guns and solve our problems like adults in the 21st century. No one wants a revolution on their hands.

Put your money to good use.

http://www.amazon.com/Scooby-doo-Phonics-Book-Reading-Program/sim/0439664799/2

http://www.amazon.com/The-Spelling-Book-Teaching-Children/dp/0872071928


>> ^bobknight33:

Well it is the truth.
Hear is another. Corporations have Millions and Millions of dollars are sitting idle afraid of OBAMA and his policies. If OBAMA wins that money will stay idle or be invested overseas. If OBAMA looses that money will be a title-wave of economic activity the likes we have not seen in years.

If you want a job vote Romney
If you want to keep you job vote Romney.
If you want to loose you job vote Obama.


>> ^VoodooV:
>> ^bobknight33:
Nothing wrong with what this man said.
Obama - Is always the same. Marxist Socialist Muslim loving anti American.
I rather go with a American flip flopper than a Marxist Socialist Muslim loving anti American.

yeah, because that argument is working out so well for the campaign. Why stop there? I think he has a black top hat and a furled mustache too. Damnit Obmaa! quit tying that damsel to the train tracks and cackling maniacally.
So what are you guys going to do when Romney loses? The Republicans have made it their singular goal to get rid of Obama, when that fails, and you know it's going to happen. That really makes the Reps seem impotent, doesn't it.

Well it is the truth.

Hear is another. Corporations have Millions and Millions of dollars are sitting idle afraid of OBAMA and his policies. If OBAMA wins that money will stay idle or be invested overseas. If OBAMA looses that money will be a title-wave of economic activity the likes we have not seen in years.


If you want a job vote Romney
If you want to keep you job vote Romney.

If you want to loose you job vote Obama.





>> ^VoodooV:

>> ^bobknight33:
Nothing wrong with what this man said.
Obama - Is always the same. Marxist Socialist Muslim loving anti American.
I rather go with a American flip flopper than a Marxist Socialist Muslim loving anti American.

yeah, because that argument is working out so well for the campaign. Why stop there? I think he has a black top hat and a furled mustache too. Damnit Obmaa! quit tying that damsel to the train tracks and cackling maniacally.
So what are you guys going to do when Romney loses? The Republicans have made it their singular goal to get rid of Obama, when that fails, and you know it's going to happen. That really makes the Reps seem impotent, doesn't it.

>> ^bobknight33:

Nothing wrong with what this man said.
Obama - Is always the same. Marxist Socialist Muslim loving anti American.

I rather go with a American flip flopper than a Marxist Socialist Muslim loving anti American.


yeah, because that argument is working out so well for the campaign. Why stop there? I think he has a black top hat and a furled mustache too. Damnit Obmaa! quit tying that damsel to the train tracks and cackling maniacally.

So what are you guys going to do when Romney loses? The Republicans have made it their singular goal to get rid of Obama, when that fails, and you know it's going to happen. That really makes the Reps seem impotent, doesn't it.

>> ^BoneRemake:

>> ^Sepacore:
Wow Sultan, way to get your gene's out there.
Why so much hating on poor Sultan, they make him out to be an irresponsible sexual predator when he's just doing his natural biologically-driven thing, which is being a irresponsible sexual predator.
The options as i see it are: freedom/ignore-issue, sterilize/cut off balls, sex-education lessons, imprison/house cat, terminate or relocate to government funded cat-ladies.
Solution: roll a die per cat and see what fate the cat gets.

You forgot a bag and a river or ol' uncle .22


lol, being a cat lover I thought it better to cover all the potential methods for that general group of dealings under a single word, as the list of creative options ranging from ironically-funny to disturbing-cruel could fill a book.

I say, put them in front of a sex ed video of cool cats with top hats taking drugs and going to sex clubs, where by they contract STD's.. if that doesn't sort out those slutty felines, then it's probably because they're cats..

321 kitteh's.. i so want to high-five that guy

Did you all notice how it say's the owner is worse, and yet they still come to the conclusion we should have at the cat? Apply that logic to other circumstances.

I've had a goatee since my early 20's. I'm actually interested to try the complete reverse of it; the 19th century lengthy mutton chop look, sans goatee and mustache, as I have a round face which would suit it. It'd also give me a good reason to go buy a top hat. Not for another 10-15 years though.

Thanks, homey! Here's another trade secret: the rabbit is already inside the top hat, only hidden!

>> ^garmachi:

>> ^quantumushroom:
Gay prisms ruin the straightness of light.

Dude, that was very clever. The implied rainbow really makes that joke work!