Betty White would've been 100 if we skipped all February 29ths while she was alive.

Congratulations! Your video, Betty White dirty joke about William Shatner, has reached the #1 spot in the current Top 15 New Videos listing. This is a very difficult thing to accomplish but you managed to pull it off. For your contribution you have been awarded 2 Power Points.

This achievement has earned you your "Golden One" Level 1 Badge!

Your video, Betty White dirty joke about William Shatner, has made it into the Top 15 New Videos listing. Congratulations on your achievement. For your contribution you have been awarded 1 Power Point.

I can think of at least 1 million, 345 thousand and...

Should we add on to that list? I'll go first.

When Betty Boop AND Betty White were both hot at the same time!
...

Your video, Betty White & Johnny Carson - Adam and Eve, has made it into the Top 15 New Videos listing. Congratulations on your achievement. For your contribution you have been awarded 1 Power Point.

Your video, Community - Anthropology Rap ft. Betty White, has made it into the Top 15 New Videos listing. Congratulations on your achievement. For your contribution you have been awarded 1 Power Point.

*promote more Betty White!

I've seen better cock-grabs from Betty White's candid camera show.

Truly expected Betty White's name to be somewhere in the credits.
Breaking down the stereotypes of seniors is something up her ally.

I forgot about that video. I thought there was something like that, but wasn't 100% sure. I always like to use Betty White's line from Community for situations like that: "You use your self respect to defend yourself, while I use this cross bow."

I tried to find a Betty White joke about testicles on youtube. No luck. Ah well.

I'm sure she did do it better. A few more years experience with comic timing, yeah?

>> ^meggymoo:

Betty White did it better

Betty White did it better

I'm disappointed, I thought Betty white did that joke first but apparently she stole it from this guy.

What's Betty White doing up on stage with Cee-lo?

Anti-realism is not a term that is conventionally applied to language. You were employing a metaphor. That's fine; that's how all language works. There would be no words, and no dictionary to look them up in, if we didn't use metaphor.

This belief that a word can have only one narrow and arbitrary meaning, which its enforcers have memorised and to which they will allow no opposition, is dangerous and stifling to discourse. It's particularly bizarre in the context of this discussion since I'm sure, if we could be bothered to check, we would find many examples in dictionaries and other scholarly instruments of the term 'fascist' applied much more loosely than I've proposed here. It's often used, legitimately, as a simple synonym for 'bully'.

You'll notice that far from insisting on my own, I allow your meaning, and Webster's and mine all together. I only say that mine is better, being a pruned and perfected incarnation of its relatives. If we didn't prefer our own ideas to those of others there would be no point to independent thought at all.

I think you ought to read my posts more carefully and assume, for the sake of scientific inquiry, that I might be as smart as you are.>> ^Kofi:

Yes, I am calling you a linguistic anti-realist. This fails for although all language is an artificial creation it none the less is functional insofar as it appeals to a common ontology within the cultural paradigm of any given language. In other words, despite the notion that language only represents a idea of an impression and can never actually directly communicate that impression itself, it is reasonable and viable to believe that language, specifically the English language, is adequate to convey a moderately complicated term such as 'fascism'.
I am also implying that you are unable to grasp the necessary condition of assuming a commonality of language appropriate for meaningful communication. It appears that you are aware of it but have failed to admit that you made a mistake for fear of looking silly.
Instead you are insisting on a revisionist interpretation of a political terminologies that failed to fulfil any semblance of general mutual agreement, a necessary condition for cohesive discourse, in a deliberate effort to harness its rhetorical impact.