Thursday, December 21, 2006

The Scarlet R in Action

In my post on the Scarlet R, I noted that Republicans are often called vile names in response to their political leanings, especially in institutions of "higher learning." Here is a prime example at the Volokh Conspiracy of the type of denigrating behavior professors get away with at these paragons of diversity for the sole reason that the recipient is the wrong color and political orientation:

Washington State University Professor Calls Student "White Shitbag" at Demonstration: The WSU investigation report is here. The College Republicans organized an anti-illegal-immigration event, featuring a "24-foot, chain-link, cyclone fence, later established as a representation of a 'Wall of Immigration.'" Professor John Streamas showed up, got into an argument with Dan Ryder, a College Republicans member, and in the process called him a "white shitbag."


Now imagine the tables were turned and a white professor called a black student Democrat the same type of derogatory name in reverse? Would that professor still have a job? Maybe, but you better believe that the professor would be a pariah and the repercussions a lot worse than a reprimand.

67 Comments:

Blogger Gen. JC Christian, Patriot said...

God knows, given the historical, sad, sorry plight of the white Christian male, calling a sudent a "white shitbag" should carry the same consequences as calling one a black scumbag.

8:45 AM, December 21, 2006  
Blogger Helen said...

Gen.JC Christian, "patriot,"

Yes, it should. If you want to get into revenge from what happened years ago, then when will it end? People of all colors and political persuasions should be equal under the law and in universities if we really have "diversity." While I am a proponent of free speech and people have the right to call others what they wish, one group is not obligated to "take it" any more than any other.

8:54 AM, December 21, 2006  
Blogger dadvocate said...

"white shitbag", "nazi fascist", etc. are considered acceptable terms by the left to describe anyone to the right of their beliefs. The left has no solid rational foundation for their beliefs wo they spew venom instead.

9:08 AM, December 21, 2006  
Anonymous Friend of USA said...

The non-written rules imposed on us by the left since the 60s for black people, feminists, gays and the left are the same;

They can call white people on the right anything they want, but white conservatives can not do the same,
( they usually don't anyway )

It is a boxing match where one side makes the rules to its advantage, he can hit us below the belt, in the back or even after the bell, but we must obey the strictest code of conduct, we must be squeaky clean.

I'm no psychologist, but that behavior reminds me of dictators...

And that is how it often feels, to me anyway; the left is a legion of millions of little dictators who impose all sorts of things on us even the words we can use.

And just like dictators they say it is for the good of the people.

The more I look at it the more I see similiraties...

9:52 AM, December 21, 2006  
Anonymous Friend of USA said...

similiraties is similar to similarities...

9:53 AM, December 21, 2006  
Blogger Evan M. Thomas said...

I'm afraid that the more out of the mainstream leftness gets the more violent it will become.

10:03 AM, December 21, 2006  
Blogger MadMatt said...

To paraphrase freud...sometimes a shitbag is just a shitbag...they just happen to be republicans more often because republican beliefs are based on oppressing people for profit or to benefit those who pay...either financially or politically!

10:14 AM, December 21, 2006  
Anonymous whatsupchuck said...

Name calling, no matter the source, is childish and usually happens when a person is unable to respond with logical and rational discourse.

It has become all too common in this time of extreme divisiveness. Let's not pretend that one side does it more than the other.

10:19 AM, December 21, 2006  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

I guess when the President and Vice President and many members of the Republican party call many distinguished and honorable Democrats, including, myself, traitors and terrorists its okay, right?

10:33 AM, December 21, 2006  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

It is interesting to see the Leftwing Psychological Response to what is clearly an asymmetrical situation: "well, Republicans are bad, too."

Very nice.

11:03 AM, December 21, 2006  
Anonymous bugs said...

It's mostly about power. I recall hearing some pretty vile things from Republicans about Clinton during his eight-year fun-fest. Now that they're in power, they're fairly cool - now it's the Democrats going off the deep end.

Watch what happens when/if the Dems keep their majority in Congress and win the next Presidential election. The moonbats will go back into hibernation and suddenly everything will be right with the world. The Republicans, on the other hand, will go back to their moral degeneracy attacks. It's all stupid and all vile, but hey...welcome to America.

As to calling Democrats traitors and terrorists - I think it depends on which Democrats you're talking about and how they express their views. Merely expressing opposition to the war or Bush don't call for that kind of rhetoric. Other behaviors certainly do.

What we could really use is for people to learn to express themselves forcefully without sounding completely out of control and out of touch with reality. Especially politicians - who are supposed to know something about expressing themselves effectively. Making outrageous statements and paranoid claims may make you feel heroic, but they don't inspire much confidence in your ability to govern.

11:41 AM, December 21, 2006  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

So this is somehow different from Dick Cheney telling Patrick Leahy to "Go fuck yourself!" or Bush calling Adam Clymer " A major league asshole", to which Cheney responded "Big time"?

I think you also missed the point earlier that calling someone a black scumbag wouldn't have any consequences either.

11:52 AM, December 21, 2006  
Blogger Helen said...

anonymous 11:52:

I think Michael Richards would beg to differ.

12:00 PM, December 21, 2006  
Anonymous Jim said...

"I think you also missed the point earlier that calling someone a black scumbag wouldn't have any consequences either."

And I think you're delusional if you really think such an idiocy. We just watched a legal lynch mob go after three men in NC over the accusations of a scheming whore of a stripper whose only claim to credibility or sympathy was that she was black and that they were white. So save your kumbaya-era moral exhibitionism for someone who will fall for it.

University speech codes are quite blatant in discrimination against certain groups and in favor of others.

On top of that, this was a professor speaking to students, someone clearly in the position of power, pulling out that preacher-ass old lie some one in a Black Studies Dept. somewhere, about how minority people can never be racist because racism is about a power differential.

12:04 PM, December 21, 2006  
Anonymous Grumpy Ol' Veteran said...

The culture overall has become a lot coarser. When I first raised questions about why we were ignoring Afghanistan and sending our soliders to Iraq, I was called "Saddam Lover" and "Traitor" as well as such old standards as "idiot," and of course, "faggot," a favorite of people who inject sexuality into all sorts of arguments.
I grew up conservative because I was appalled by the coarseness of 60's protestors, even when they had valid points. I preferred the approach of William F. Buckley, who said he believed that if he is right, he should be sophisticated about it.
In the 1980s Newt Gingrich wrote the talking points that repubicans should describe Democrats with such words as "sick" and "traitor." President Bill Clinton was accused of being a rapist (the record seems to be that he attracted groupies, oddly enough), a mass murderer and a drug runner. These smears were spraed by the same people who now pitifully complain about how mean "the Bush haters" are.
Yes, there's inarticulate idiots on the left. But I don't think there's ever been a centrally directed call for rotten language to compare with that of Newt Gingrich.

12:05 PM, December 21, 2006  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

"I think Michael Richards would beg to differ."


Puhleeez, Helen. You must be joking.

First off, Richards went on a racially motivated tirade at a comedy club. He said far worse than "black scumbag". Maybe you should watch the video.

But is he facing criminal or civil charges? Nope. Sorry.

The shadowy "left" is the convenient scapegoat for right wingers whenever they can't cope with the fact that it's the free market that's going to "punish" people like Richards. You know, capitalism at work.

But seriously, Richards is beside the point here. Is Streamas even black?

12:12 PM, December 21, 2006  
Blogger dadvocate said...

Anonymous 12:12

I propose you run an experiment. Attend a city council or county commission meeting where you live and refer to a black member of council or the commission or someone else as a "black scumbag." If you happen to be non-black, you'll find out the consequences.

And, a professor, who has much potential power and control over students, calling a student a "shitbag" of whatever color is quite different than Cheney telling someone over whom he has little if any power to "Go fuch yourself." If you don't understand the difference, I doubt you understand very much of anything except, obviously, how to make irrelevant arguments.

1:00 PM, December 21, 2006  
Anonymous "Eric Blair" said...

Sigh.

Everyone is missing the point. The point is a lack of reciprocity. I can assure that, as an academic, a white professor calling a black student "a black scumbag" would result in the firing of that professor.

Yet a black professor calling a white student "a white scumbag" will result in, at the most, a reprimand. And I frankly doubt that such will happen as time goes on.

The fact is that professors using such language on students is always wrong, if for no other reason the power differential the Left loves to bring up. ANY professor speaking that way should be reprimanded, fined, or worse.

And don't tell me that calling someone a scumbag, with a racial identifier, constitutes "free speech." Rights are not license. Otherwise the ACLU would be defending Mel Gibson and that Richards parakeet right now.

The responses from the Left on this blog are amazing. First is the statement that "everybody does it" (sounds familiar, doesn't it?). Then the statement mutates into how the Republicans are so much worse. My favorite was the person who took things said ostensibly privately by Bush and Cheney, picked up with a boom mike, and clearly not meant for public distribution---as the equivalent, somehow, of racial epithets.

All of this is beside the point. Take it back to the WSU professor's actions...and the one-sidedness of the response. And remember the original point here: how Republicans, on campus, are not treated the same way as Left-leaning organizations.

Don't believe it? Then try my experiment for a while: pretend to be a Republican professor on a campus, and see what happens. As opposed, again, to how the most outrageous Left-leaning statementsw are treated on campus.

The rest of this is reactive trollilng. But I am not surprised, since the trolling changes the subject.

1:12 PM, December 21, 2006  
Blogger J. Peden said...

"If you want to get into revenge from what happened years ago, then when will it end?" helen

Apart from demonstrating a serious lack of self, such de facto acts of reparation/retribution have probably also contributed to landing a lot of black males in prison: "whites deserve to be mugged, etc., because my blackness explains my personal failure - I am 'oppressed'."

This is always what happens when Faux Liberals try to "help" their "victims", and in fact when Faux Liberals seize control of any alleged injustice, even if the injustice has some validity to it in a small number of individual cases. Everyone suffers, including the Faux Liberals, who themselves live in a permanent state of turmoil regardless, and seem to thrive only upon this state.

Simply note the Faux Liberal's inability to think logically as demonstrated on this very site. They don't have a clue, and therefore it's impossible to explain this fact to them.

2:03 PM, December 21, 2006  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Has it even been established that this professor was black? All I know is that he was born in Japan.

Secondly, if a white professor were say, attending a demonstration put on by black student activists who were calling for (as an example here) a policy which overwhelmingly negatively affected whites, with say symbology or props present to drive the point home, do you think he'd get fired for calling them "black shitbag"? I doubt it. Further, the college republicans would have protested it to the dean's office so fast that the demonstration would never get off the ground!

Get off your pathetic, tired right wing self pity trips. These guys had a giant chain link fence with them, and they were therefore looking to create controversy and/or turmoil, which they did.

As for "j. peden", he's an outright idiot with no knowledge of statistics. Blacks are far more likely to commit crimes against other blacks than whites. Furthermore, where do you get off reading the mugger's mind? You have experience in that area?

2:16 PM, December 21, 2006  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Republicans run to Mommy every time a leftie "insults" them.

Yet Republicans are the one who will protect us from terrorists.

Hilarious!


Robert

2:26 PM, December 21, 2006  
Anonymous Greg said...

I wonder how many people have read through Helen's links to the WSU report on the incident?

Notably, the description of the event where, during the discourse, the student calls out the professor for what he says, the professor immediately apologizes for the insult, and says he shouldn't have said it... and, here's an important part, both sides then continued the debate, apparantly letting the isnult lay with that response.

I'm bringing this up because it seems a lot of the rhetoric I'm reading is calling this the ultimate example of how universities persecute Republicans and right-wingers. Somehow people aren't allowed to be people? Can anyone possibly expect that the display of such an "anti-immigration" fence in any public place wouldn't upset someone? And do people say things they normally wouldn't when they get upset? Of course they do.

I am not excusing the professor's actions. He was wrong. He said something he should not have.

However, it apparently wasn't so caustic as to completely derail the debate that the student and professor were having. And, it didn't provoke a fight. He apologized. That should be the end of it, yes? But not, for the folks on this blog? Why is that? The man apologized, and the debate continued. It isn't as if the professor sat there and chanted white shitbag over and over again. It isn't as if he burned this in the grass where the student was standing. But still, this is something that somehow is indicative of how Republicans are persecuted all over the United States?

I swear, trotting out this incident as proof that Republicans are persecuted in academia certainly isn't winning this person over to your argument.

2:34 PM, December 21, 2006  
Blogger TMink said...

OK, first, just what is a shitbag? I know what a scum bag is, but the only thing I can think of in terms of a shit bag is a colostomy bag. Rather useful those.

Then some anon wrote: "These guys had a giant chain link fence with them, and they were therefore looking to create controversy and/or turmoil, which they did."

Yep, your giant chain link is well known to start your riots. The link that started thos Chinese riots was a foot in diameter! Smaller chain link does not have the inherent insult that a big ass link does. And God knows that anyone who is looking to create a little controversy should be ethnically insulted. It is a community duty to do so. I know I do.

Besides, what is a self-respecting faculty member to do? Sit around when someone is toting a big ass chain link fence and have tea with them? Engage them in learned discorse? Have a debate? This is America! And here in America when someone throws down a big ass chain link we have but one option: illogical racial slurs.

Trey

2:53 PM, December 21, 2006  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Aha! I am betting that "greg" is our old friend "Greg Kuperberg." Doesn't matter either way.

Like "Eric Blair" said, folks are missing the points. I laughed out loud at the comment earlier that, when insulted, Republican Club members would run to the Dean and get a fair hearing. Go read up on campus follies before you say such things. Or more accurately, show me a single case where a Republican group on a campus has filed a complaint and gotten an apology when leftie types call them Nazis, etc. (apologies from the offending group or students, I mean---and remember the number of times righties need to write up long "I'm sorry" apologies when they "go over the line" on campus).

I'm waiting.

This just underscore's "Blair"s experiment: if you are an academic who thinks all of this is boohoo, then put on the pro-Republican button. Put up the pro-Bush cartoon on your office door. Give an interview in the school newspaper about how you are a "born again" Republican and now go to church weekly. In other words, do the mirror image of the leftie extremism on most campuses.

Then see what happens.

If you aren't willing to try this, then I am inclined to think that you know the truth---you just think "your side" is completely correct.

But if you REALLY believe in freedom of expression, I say give the experiment a try. After all, Republicans are just boohoo types, and there is no factual proof of anti-Republican bias on campus, right? So the experiment should be no big deal.

Just pay up on your unemployment first.

2:57 PM, December 21, 2006  
Anonymous "Eric Blair" said...

Dear Anonymous 2:57:

I agree with much of what you express (you are probably an teacher or professor, too). But there is an awful lot of heat and not enough light on this subject.

I think that readers should re-read Professor Volokh's posting on this subject, and read the comments below it:

http://volokh.com/posts/1166639678.shtml

As you can see, there is a similar quantity of vitriol and such there. And there is a photograph of Professor Streamas there, as well (who appears to be of Asian descent though I could be wrong).

Professor Volokh is a long standing proponent of the freest of free speech. So even when I disagree with him, I read his arguments carefully.

Notice, as well, he never appears to descend to name calling.

I think we all need to agree that Professor Streamas made a serious error, because of the power differential he possesses as a professor. That is independent of the strength of his arguments.

Although, as I read further, Professor Streamas appears to equate a border fence with the Nazi horrors. I do not believe that the two items are equivalent. I hope no one else does, either---regardless of partisanship or feelings about border politics.

3:26 PM, December 21, 2006  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

1. "Black scumbag" is not equivalent to the "N" word. Thought it would be nice to level the equality playing field now, you can't deny history, Helen. And the word is nothing but loaded with history. That's the power of most words, you see.

2. Quite logically, there's a reason this professor used the identifier "white". Presumably, the words he chose also spoke of a message. My opinion is he thought the (white) student probably had no knowledge of what he was protesting because of who he was. You can debate that of course, but calling him "white" had a purpose. It wasn't just a slur alone, like the "N" word is. Hence it had to be paired with scumbag. (See, the N word presumes inferiority -- so comparing this professor to Michael Richards does not cut it).


---------

The problem with targeting language -- trying to compare situations -- is that not everything is equal and measures the same. Is it anti-PC to say that? I see a failure of logic in arguments like Professor Helen's here, and more reason to fear the PC sensitive right for what they find offensive to protect whites and men. Comparing apples and oranges may go over in the academic world, but not the real one with a knowledge of everyday injustices.

4:41 PM, December 21, 2006  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Not Professor Helen,
I meant "Doctor" Helen of course.

4:44 PM, December 21, 2006  
Anonymous bugs said...

Which is to say, last anonymous is OK with racial discrimination as long as the "correct" people are discriminated against. Nice.

5:26 PM, December 21, 2006  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

The problem with conservatives is that throughout history they have never been right on a single issue. Women's suffrage? Civil rights? Even women's rights to choose is suppported by a majority of Americans, which leads me to believe that history will deem you losers there too.

Conservatives are a bunch of bitter old dinosaurs incapable of adaptation and change.

Poor things, can't say "black scumbag." Systematically destroying this country for twelve years from habeas corpus to tax cuts for Paris Hilton and increased "clean skies" (meaning more global warming). Four years in which your every wildest legislative dream could come to fruition. And you're bitching about not being able to call someone a black bastard!?!

Apparently there is at least one academic institution that's not liberal, the good old redneck-as-hell university of Tennessee. When you make grads of UGA, such as myself, seem hyper-intelligent, you have a serious problem old rocky top.

I can't wait until you are politically irrelevant.

5:43 PM, December 21, 2006  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Dear Anonymous 5:43:

Puh-leeze.

You might want to be just a mite careful in your historical analysis of Conservative/Republican positions.

Such as slavery, for example. Go read a history book. We'll all wait.

Back? Great. The Republicans were the anti-slavery party. Now, you will shuck and jive and weave to avoid it. You will say that Conservatives are different than Republicans...but you surely aren't claiming that Conservatives are in the Democratic party, are you?

I guess you know better than the history books, don't you?

How about the Civil Rights Act of 1964? Ever look at who voted for and against it, and their party affiliations? Whoops! Some people still on the Democratic side of the Senate TODAY voted against it. Do you want to condemn them now?

We'll wait for you to criticize Robert Byrd, former officer in the KKK and user of the "N" word on national television a couple of years ago.

Imagine a current member of the Senate, Republican, who had been an officer in the KKK, voted against the Civil Rights Act, and used the "N" word two years ago? Why, such a person would not be tolerated in DC.

Comments on the consistency of your political convictions?

(sound of crickets, followed by a list of eeeevvvvviiiiiilllll Republicans---but no responsive answer).

As for the U of T being redneck (nice tolerant phrase, that), you might want to ask Dr. Helen and Professor Reynolds if they had bumper stickers on their cars during the last election....and if those bumper stickers were NOT pro-Democratic, what happened to them.

(sound of crickets, followed by sneers about "baby" Republicans who complain too much---unless, of course, the complainers are in a Democratic approved grievance group).

Peddle your trollsome attitudes elsewhere. You don't mean to be that extremist, or you are simply ignorant of history and reality. My guess is that you know better, and are just trolling

It's like your amazingly ignorant and insulting statement:

"The problem with conservatives is that throughout history they have never been right on a single issue."

Wow.

Then you follow it up with an interesting "majority rules" argument regarding abortion rights.

"Even women's rights to choose is suppported by a majority of Americans...."

So how do you feel about that whole "majority rules" business when it comes to affirmative action, immigration, or gay marriage?

(sound of crickets, followed by hypocritical elitist statements about how the average American is ignorant when they disagree with your ideas.).

Sheesh.

6:07 PM, December 21, 2006  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Which is to say, last anonymous is OK with racial discrimination as long as the "correct" people are discriminated against. Nice.


I don't think calling someone a white scumbag qualifies as "discrimination".

It's namecalling folks. You want to outlaw namecalling now, because some boys are being trained to be sensitive? Sheesh

6:50 PM, December 21, 2006  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Does anybody remember the humor skit, Doug and Wendy Whiiiiiiiner?

I can think of another qualifying couple.

6:53 PM, December 21, 2006  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Dear Anonymous 6:50:

It's not about namecalling alone. It is about the subject the left loves when convenient: a differential power structure. The professor screwed up. Why not admit it, and move on?

Namecalling is just fine. You do it quite a bit, in fact. But professors should not, because they have true power over students (saying that the offended party wasn't in the offensive's professor's class is beside the point, as you know quite well). Off campus, of course the professors can call people whatever they like. But on campus, they are paid to have MORE responsibility and MORE self control.


As for Anonymous 6:53, I can see that he or she has no answer to the criticisms above, and resorts to juvenile humor. This is as expected, since he or she cannot debate intelligently.

Like was said in the thread, originally, I expected the lithium-free Kos types to come troll, and see if they could get people upset.

6:59 PM, December 21, 2006  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Oh, and Anonymous 6:50? My father thinks that the "N" word is not offensive, either. Who decides if he is right or wrong? Do we vote on it?

Why do YOU get to choose what is offensive language, more than the people to whom the offensive language is directed?

Sounds like more elitism to me. YOU get to decide when and how people can be offended, or when they are petty whiners.

Not very consistent of you. And elitist. Here I thought those eeeevvvviiiil Republicans, what with Halliburton and no taxes and such, were the elitists?

7:02 PM, December 21, 2006  
Blogger Craig said...

As tempted as I am to say that any race should equally be able to be called pretty nasty names if they're republican, that's not my view.

I do think it's worth mentioning that not all the groups are 'equal' in terms of what names they deserve to be called. When a democrat speaks out for helping the poor and a republican says 'let them starve, the world will be a better place' (offered for illustration of my point, not meant to accurately portray republican views), the names the democrat and republican deserve to be called are not the same.

The republicans are for some foolish and evil policies, and deserve more names. However, I also understand that they *think* the same of democrats, and it leaves us with the issue that both sides throwing names at each other, even when one of them is correct, makes discussion difficult.

For the reason that I think this sort of name is unhelpful, and the reason above, I'll condemn the name-calling in the article; and note the hypocrisy of the right on the excesses of their side.

Please, link for me your blog condemning Cheney for "go fuck yourself" to the distinguished Sen. Patrick Leahy. I condemn both; few on the right do.

No, this is merely the sort of whining that you see a group of evildoiers do to escape the guilt they deserve to feel for their policies, so they get to criticize someone else.

It's not that you're wrong, but that you are wrongly selective.

7:19 PM, December 21, 2006  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Hey, Craig:

Speaking of selective, you seem to assume that everyone opposed to you is in the same camp. Not true.

Some Republican/conservatives detest Ann Coulter's histrionics, for example.

Again, I would love to hear some high profile Democrats attack (for example) Robert Byrd's use of the "N" word just a couple of years ago. Heck, Charlie Rangel and the Black Caucus were silent on the issue.

So please don't paint with a broad brush. I am particularly disturbed by this statement of yours:

"The republicans are for some foolish and evil policies, and deserve more names."

Wow. Pretty broad tent there, friend. And yet you say that ALL of us "deserve" nasty names...and you claim that we are "worse" than the not so nice people in your own group.

Again, why do YOU get to decide this? YOU get to judge, for example, my mother and father, as well as John McCain and Arnold Schwartzenegger. And so forth. YOU get to do that?

Sorry, but I don't judge all "Democrats" by the bizarre and hateful language I see on Daily Kos.

Strange you are willing to lump so many people together into one group. But not surprising. Look at the posts above---lots of name calling, misstatements of history (always blaming eeeevvvvvillll Republicans, just as you do).

Let's condemn ALL the name-calling, and start thinking about common solutions. Despite what one poster was (and inconsistently so) regarding "majority rules" roughly half the population disagrees with you.

So that half "deserves" all the vitriol and name calling? I thought that "majority rules"?

Now, of course, you will trot out examples of bad Republicans. So what? It's time to find common ground, instead of the scorched earth that you appear to favor.

7:38 PM, December 21, 2006  
Anonymous "Eric Blair" said...

Anonymous has a point for both sides, really. If half of the population is in the John Kerry orbit, and the other half in the George W. Bush orbit, then we have to accept several things:

1. The "other side" isn't crazy.
2. The "other side" is stupid.
3. The "other side" isn't evil.

It's time to start removing all the extremist nonsense from the political debate. Look at the posts above to see deeply insulting and (more importantly) inaccurate comments---all because one "side" thinks that their own belief system is 100% perfect.

My guess is that the electorate would dearly love to see a moderate or two--on both sides of the Divide---in 2008. If the primary system won't let us have some moderate candidates, perhaps we need to rethink the system. All of us, together.

Think of it this way: if we all starting working together, the trolls will go away.

9:16 PM, December 21, 2006  
Anonymous CaptDMO said...

"To paraphrase freud...sometimes a shitbag is just a shitbag..."
10:14 AM
... the student calls out the professor for what he says, the professor immediately apologizes for the insult, (snip) both sides then continued the debate, apparantly letting the insult lay with that response.
2:34 PM

Sounds good to me!
*sheesh*

"Don't believe it? Then try my experiment for a while: pretend to be a Republican professor on a campus, and see what happens."
1:12 PM
Oooo, "Conservitive like me!" Could be a big seller!

OT,in an attempt to be as silly as the
phenomina.
"OK, first, just what is a shitbag?
Trey
2:53 PM

Dogs in cities and suburbs know,if they have their owners well trained!
Also, think paper bag of poop on the doorstep, light on fire, ring the door bell. Run around the house and ring the BACK door bell.(again, suburbs)
Forward Observers in a strange land may have an explination as well.
Perhaps manure (of all sorts)packaged for retail? Nah....that's usefull stuff too!

I'll risk a guess that a throw away "shitbag" used here is about the same as pendejo in spanish, in that there's obviously something recognised as "the truth hurts" irksome to the user if they take the trouble to say it to a targets face.

But that's just me!

10:01 PM, December 21, 2006  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

and resorts to juvenile humor.

Hey -- that was a great skit. Pre steroid Joe Piscopo.

See, when you nitpick the words and humor, everything in society becomes an argument.

Plus you get stressed out and tend to have health troubles and die young. Laugh and get over yourself, eh? Scumbag!

10:34 PM, December 21, 2006  
Blogger just thinking said...

Not safe to be a Republican or a Christian these days.

10:41 PM, December 21, 2006  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Why do YOU get to choose what is offensive language, more than the people to whom the offensive language is directed?

Sounds like more elitism to me. YOU get to decide when and how people can be offended, or when they are petty whiners.


Whiiiiiine. Whiiiiiine. Whiiiiiiine...

Words aren't criminalized.
Michael Richards was charged, convicted and is being tarred in the COURT OF PUBLIC OPINION. There's a diff, get it?

I decide if I want. You decide if you want. Religious organizations, lobbying organizations... everybody gets a piece. If your say is loud enough, you end up "convicted" like Richards. Words have histories, like I said earlier. They're not equal, no matter what the do-good p.c. or whiiiiny white boys (yep, I can say that!) may tell you. White scumbag, society says, floats. Other words with a past don't right now. Look at the Holocaust. Used to be untouchable, now you can joke a bit more. Same with the N word you hear now in rap songs.

Listen, if the Republicans want to imitate Tipper Gore from a few years back and fight for pc nonsense like making such a big deal that a 20 year old student is called a "white scumbag" by a professor out of class who immediately apologized, go for it. Makes em look like Whiiiiiiiners. Makes me wonder, hey -- that all you got? Eh. fuck em

10:41 PM, December 21, 2006  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Not safe to be a Republican or a Christian these days.

Lol!
Don't fret for the true Christians any. They're always prepared to gird their loins and follow the Messiah's words. Takes a bit more than namecalling to daunt the best of them. :)

(and I predict you'll lose the Catholic vote)

10:45 PM, December 21, 2006  
Blogger Kirk Parker said...

"As to calling Democrats traitors and terrorists - I think it depends on which Democrats you're talking about"

Well, let's get specific, then: Joe Lieberman, not a traitor. Jane Harman, not a traitor. Not Hillary Clinton, either, nor my very own Congressman Norm Dicks. But "Baghdad" Jim McDermott, most definitely yes. John f'n "back-channel meetings with the enemy while wearing the uniform" Kerry, absolutely yes.

12:42 AM, December 22, 2006  
Blogger SpecialOpsDude said...

I would be honored to be called a "white shitbag" by some university professor. I'd consider it a badge of honor.

It'll be a few years though, as I'm currently on deployment number 4 in support of OIF/OEF. Merry Christmas everyone!

12:55 AM, December 22, 2006  
Blogger J. Peden said...

"As for "j. peden", he's an outright idiot with no knowledge of statistics. Blacks are far more likely to commit crimes against other blacks than whites. Furthermore, where do you get off reading the mugger's mind? You have experience in that area?"
anon 2:16

Thanks, anon. QED

1:34 AM, December 22, 2006  
Anonymous james said...

and this is so unlike bush & cheney calling the reporter a "major asshole"? when people get passionate, they start using obscenities -- regardless of political leanings. yawn. more important things going on don't you think?

4:21 AM, December 22, 2006  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

I believe the professor in question is Japanese, not African-American.

5:01 AM, December 22, 2006  
Anonymous witless chum said...

"You will say that Conservatives are different than Republicans...but you surely aren't claiming that Conservatives are in the Democratic party, are you?"

In 1861 they were. And again in 1964, which is why most of them were Republicans by 1972. The Dems didn't become the home of all the liberals until that generation of John Lindsey/Nelson Rockefeller Republicans went away by the mid-70s.

As to the point,
I guess I don't buy that its as tough for conservatives on campus as is being portrayed here. I went to Michigan State in the late 90s and I had professors who were righty and loud and proud about it. One, who was fairly open about being an evangelical and being disapproving of his student's sinful ways, devoted an entire class section of Introduction to Biologocial Sciences to tell us about STDs and how condoms were a bill of goods sold to the American people. He was a pretty good guy, despite his an my many, deep disagreements, but he didn't get run off campus for this.

The president of MSU at the time, was by the by, an official in the Nixon, Ford and Reagan Administrations who was later called on by the current president to fix the currency of Iraq, M. Peter McPherson. (McPete finally figured out a way to appear before large numbers of studnets and not be booed, in 2003, when he came out at half time of a football game with three of four veterans of Afghanistan. That's as much about beer as politics, though.)

So I don't know if things have hugely changed, or if you're all hanging out at small liberal arts colleges, but that wasn't my experience.

9:49 AM, December 22, 2006  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Hey, Witless Chum:

Ah...Robert Byrd is a Republican? Not. And remember, he was the great guy who led the filibuster against the Civil Rights amendment. I notice that you don't reply to the business of how the media treated Byrd for using the "N" word on national television. That is a good recent example of the differential treatment that the right and left receive in the media. Again, stick to the subject of Robert Byrd. Go show me anyone in the Black Caucus in congress who spoke against him.

Why not name some names at Michigan State? I am particularly interested in a biology prof who is openly religious in the classroom there. It's not that I don't believe you. I just want to check it out.

But honestly, read the FIRE website (www.thefire.org) and learn that open debate and free expression are not common on college campuses anywhere.

As for all the other recent posters, carrying on about "whining" and such, listen: do the experiment. My guess is that most of the people acting all butch on the subject are actually pretty quiet and withdrawn away from a keyboard. It's easy to sound tough on a website.

So do the experiment. "Pretend" to be a right wing conservative on campus, and be as "in your face" as the Left is on campus. After all, free expression is what is championed on campus, right?

Or you can just continue trying to sound all tough here and call people names. After all, you don't take any risk by doing so. Try it on campus.

12:13 PM, December 22, 2006  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

I think the point is that I at least thought you people were all about ragging the liberals for their attempts to limit speech for PC purposes. If that is wrong, then you are wrong to suggest that anything should be done to this professor.

You can say he made a mistake (he did) and he's an ass (quite possibly), but shouldn't you be fighting for his right to speak his mind?

If you want to say that these matters aren't handled equally (ok to say "white shitbag" but not the N word) then I would agree with you--these sorts of statements aren't treated the same and probably should be. But I think in fairness, you should be clear that you believe this man has the right to say whatever bullshit he wants. And so does Michael Richards. And so does Ward Churchill.

But you can't be an apologist for Michael Richards and Mel Gibson and Jerry Falwell, and not for this man--without looking like you have an axe to grind and are biased beyond reason.

2:25 PM, December 22, 2006  
Anonymous "Eric Blair" said...

Actually, the point is that professors have a power differential on campus.

And in fact lots of people at WSU are making precisely your argument about the Ethnic Studies professor in question. Where many of us differ is that college communities do not generally support "right of center" freedom of speech the way they do "left of center" speech.

But even if the fellow was verbose, we should applaud the President at Columbia for stating is wrong to suppress speech.

http://www.columbia.edu/cu/president/communications%20files/updatesoncampusseechissues.htm

It makes me hopeful, even if the grammar is unusual. The students who tried to silence the Minutemen spokesman were wrong. The correct thing to do is debate opponents, not shout them down or physicallly threaten them.

If you believe in freedom of expression on campus (again, professors need to be more carefu because of power differentials; the focus should be on students), you should read up on and support FIRE.

www.thefire.org

They don't just support "right of center" issues, friends. They do support the concept of a campus as being a place where free speech should exist...regardless of party affiliation.

5:36 PM, December 22, 2006  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

"The students who tried to silence the Minutemen spokesman were wrong. The correct thing to do is debate opponents, not shout them down or physicallly threaten them."

hahahahahahahahaha

just like these "minutemen" want to do to mexicans legal and illegal. yeah. dialogue, baby.

white scumbags.

11:32 AM, December 23, 2006  
Anonymous Hattie said...

Why aren't you blonde?

10:13 AM, December 26, 2006  
Blogger TMink said...

Anon the brave wrote "just like these "minutemen" want to do to mexicans legal and illegal. yeah. dialogue, baby."


My understanding of Minutemen procedures is that they just call in the pros when they see people that they think are breaking the law. What is the problem with that? Are you also against people calling the police to report that someone is selling crack next door?

Also, why mention Mexicans? It seems as if you are attempting to slur the organization as racist. You will have to do more than make an offhand comment for anyone to be persuaded by your post.

Trey

4:19 PM, December 27, 2006  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

If you missed it, that was someone asking why mention mexicans in relation to the minutemen, who as we know are also known for their bowling.

6:44 AM, January 07, 2007  
Blogger look said...

情趣用品,
性感睡衣,
免費視訊聊天,
視訊交友網,
美姬圖影,
情境坊歡愉用品,
花美姬情趣用品,
成人圖片,
臺灣情色網,
嘟嘟情人色網,
色情網站,
情境坊歡愉用品,
徵信,
徵信公司,
徵信,
外遇,
徵信,
徵信,
抓姦,
徵信,
外遇,
徵信,
徵信社,
徵信社,
抓姦,
徵信社,
徵信社,
徵信社,
,
,
整型,
視訊聊天,
視訊交友,
AV女優,
色情,
A片,
A片,
情趣用品,
情色,
A片,
色情影片,
情趣用品,
A片,
AV女優,
視訊聊天室,
聊天,
情趣用品,
情惑用品性易購,
情侶歡愉用品,
A片,
情趣,
情惑用品性易購,
辣妹視訊,
自慰套,
情侶歡愉用品,
寄情築園小遊戲,
aio交友愛情館,
美女視訊,
色情A片,
情趣用品,
徵信社,
情趣用品,
A片,
美女視訊,
色情A片,
AV女優,
A片,
辣妹視訊,
自慰套,
情侶歡愉用品,

1:35 AM, March 15, 2009  
Blogger mmbox said...

本土成人貼圖站大台灣情色網台灣男人幫論壇A圖網嘟嘟成人電影網火辣春夢貼圖網情色貼圖俱樂部台灣成人電影絲襪美腿樂園18美女貼圖區柔情聊天網707網愛聊天室聯盟台北69色情貼圖區38女孩情色網台灣映像館波波成人情色網站美女成人貼圖區無碼貼圖力量色妹妹性愛貼圖區日本女優貼圖網日本美少女貼圖區亞洲風暴情色貼圖網哈啦聊天室美少女自拍貼圖辣妹成人情色網台北女孩情色網辣手貼圖情色網AV無碼女優影片男女情色寫真貼圖a片天使俱樂部萍水相逢遊戲區平水相逢遊戲區免費視訊交友90739免費視訊聊天辣妹視訊 - 影音聊天網080視訊聊天室日本美女肛交美女工廠貼圖區百分百貼圖區亞洲成人電影情色網台灣本土自拍貼圖網麻辣貼圖情色網好色客成人圖片貼圖區711成人AV貼圖區台灣美女貼圖區筱萱成人論壇咪咪情色貼圖區momokoko同學會視訊kk272視訊情色文學小站成人情色貼圖區嘟嘟成人網嘟嘟情人色網 - 貼圖區免費色情a片下載台灣情色論壇成人影片分享免費視訊聊天區微風 成人 論壇kiss文學區taiwankiss文學區

8:14 AM, March 22, 2009  
Blogger mmbox said...

2008真情寫真aa片免費看捷克論壇微風論壇大眾論壇plus論壇080視訊聊天室情色視訊交友90739美女交友-成人聊天室色情小說做愛成人圖片區豆豆色情聊天室080豆豆聊天室 小辣妹影音交友網台中情人聊天室桃園星願聊天室高雄網友聊天室新中台灣聊天室中部網友聊天室嘉義之光聊天室基隆海岸聊天室中壢網友聊天室南台灣聊天室南部聊坊聊天室台南不夜城聊天室南部網友聊天室屏東網友聊天室台南網友聊天室屏東聊坊聊天室雲林網友聊天室大學生BBS聊天室網路學院聊天室屏東夜語聊天室孤男寡女聊天室一網情深聊天室心靈饗宴聊天室流星花園聊天室食色男女色情聊天室真愛宣言交友聊天室情人皇朝聊天室上班族成人聊天室上班族f1影音視訊聊天室哈雷視訊聊天室080影音視訊聊天室38不夜城聊天室援交聊天室080080哈啦聊天室台北已婚聊天室已婚廣場聊天室 夢幻家族聊天室摸摸扣扣同學會聊天室520情色聊天室QQ成人交友聊天室免費視訊網愛聊天室愛情公寓免費聊天室拉子性愛聊天室柔情網友聊天室哈啦影音交友網哈啦影音視訊聊天室櫻井莉亞三點全露寫真集123上班族聊天室尋夢園上班族聊天室成人聊天室上班族080上班族聊天室6k聊天室粉紅豆豆聊天室080豆豆聊天網新豆豆聊天室080聊天室免費音樂試聽流行音樂試聽免費aa片試看免費a長片線上看色情貼影片免費a長片

8:14 AM, March 22, 2009  
Blogger nini said...

85cc免費影城 愛情公寓正妹牆川藏第一美女 成人影片 情色交友網 美女視訊 美女視訊 視訊情人高雄網 JP成人影城 383成人影城 aa片免費a片下載 a片線上看aa片免費看 ※a片線上試看※sex520免費影片※ aa片免費看 BT成人論壇 金瓶影片交流區 自拍美女聊天室 aa片免費a片下載 SEX520免費影片 免費a片 日本美女寫真集 sex520aa免費影片 sex520aa免費影片 BT成人網 Hotsee免費視訊交友 百分百貼影片區 SEX520免費影片 免費視訊聊天室 情人視訊高雄網 星光情色討論版 正妹牆 383成人影城 線上85cc免費影城 85cc免費影城 85cc免費影城 85cc免費影城 ※免費視訊聊天室※ ※免費視訊聊天室※ 免費視訊聊天室 85cc免費影片 85cc免費影片 080苗栗人聊天室 080苗栗人聊天室 080中部人聊天室 080中部人聊天室 免費a片下載 免費a片 AA片免費看 aa片免費看 aa片免費看 aa片免費看 aa片免費看 日本av女優影片 av女優 av女優無碼影城 av女優 av女優 百分百成人圖片 百分百成人圖片 視訊情人高雄網 電話交友 影音電話交友 絕色影城 絕色影城 夜未眠成人影城 夜未眠成人影城 色咪咪影片網 色咪咪影片網 色咪咪影片網 色咪咪影片網 色咪咪影片網 免費色咪咪貼影片 免費色咪咪貼影片 色情遊戲 色情遊戲 色情遊戲 色情遊戲 影音視訊交友網 視訊交友網 080視訊聊天室 ※免費視訊聊天室※ ※免費視訊聊天室※ 視訊聊天室 成人影音視訊聊天室 ut影音視訊聊天室 ※免費視訊聊天室※ 視訊ukiss聊天室視訊ukiss聊天室 視訊交友90739 視訊交友90739 情人視訊網 168視訊美女 168視訊美女 168視訊美女 視訊美女館 視訊美女館 免費視訊美女網 小高聊天室 小高聊天室 aio交友聊天室 aio交友聊天室 交友聊天室 交友聊天室 線上a片 線上a片 線上a片 線上a片 線上a片 免費線上a片 免費線上a片 嘟嘟成人網站 成人漫畫 情色文學 嘟嘟成人網 成人貼圖區 情色文學成人小說 微風成人區 情色貼圖區 免費視訊聊天 免費成人圖片區 愛情公寓 愛情公寓聊天室 寄情築園小遊戲 免費aa片線上看 aa片免費看 情色SXE聊天室 SEX情色遊戲 色情A片 免費下載 av女優 俱樂部 情色論壇 辣妹視訊 情色貼圖網 免費色情 聊天室 情人視訊聊天室 免費a片成人影城 免費a片-aa片免費看 0204貼圖區 SEX情色 交友聊天-線上免費 女優天堂 成人交友網 成人情色貼圖區 18禁 -女優王國 080視訊美女聊天室 080視訊聊天室 視訊交友90739 免費a片 aio 視訊交友網 成人影城-免費a片※免費視訊聊天※85cc免費影片日本線上免費a片 免費色咪咪影片免費色咪咪影片aaa片免費看影片aaa片免費看成人影城免費色咪咪影片

2:45 PM, April 05, 2009  
Blogger 天天看正妹 said...

"免費視訊美女520sexy girl
sogo論壇aa片免費看
免費線上 aa 片試看85CC
情色18 禁sex520免費a長片
av女優影片情色文學
日本av淫蕩人妻免費漫畫帝國
777美女dvd無碼av女優
視訊辣妹girl5320 貼片貼圖區
本土自拍影片qq 美美色網漫畫
百分百成人圖片avdvd
視訊辣妹找援交
dodo豆豆聊天室
成人影片下載免費線上a片
sex999日本美女寫真集
色情漫畫777美女dvdav
小護士免費 aa 片試看
網路自拍美女聊天室天堂
080聊天網桃園天堂
雪之深戀 080聊天網水之浪漫
sex888入口免費性影片觀賞
高中生援交偷拍自拍限制級色情 片
aa 片試看免費卡通
百分百成人情色圖片
嘟嘟情人網影片
內衣模特兒寫真成人圖貼
免費視訊78論壇
拓網學生族視訊777美女
辣妹有約辣妹no31314視訊
dudu sex免費 aa 片試看
成人a影片論壇
"

4:33 AM, April 09, 2009  
Blogger 天天看正妹 said...

免費視訊聊天
ut聊天室辣妹視訊
kk777視訊俱樂部
UT影音視訊聊天室
吉澤明步
85cc免費影片
立花里子無碼
aaa片免費看短片
美女視訊
台南視訊,080情人網
日本免費視訊
aa片免費看
視訊網愛聊天室
影音視訊交友
咆哮小老鼠分享論壇
sex520免費影片
aio辣妺視訊
百事無碼a片
jp成人影片
免費av成人 情色
免費視訊美女色美眉部落格
168論壇視訊辣妹
免費色咪咪視訊網pc交友
s383視訊玩美女人
34c高雄視訊聊天
yam交友辣妹妹影音視訊聊天室
aaa俱樂部
jp成人
Show-live視訊聊天室
免費視訊辣妹
QQ美女視訊秀
live173影音視訊聊天室
真人視訊交友
辣妹妹影音視訊聊天室
倉井空免費影片
UT視訊美女交友
視訊美女 寫真
視訊情色網
亞洲東洋影片avdvd
ut聊天室kk俱樂部視訊
激情網愛聊天
秘密情人影音視訊網
av無碼,一夜情,偷拍,免費影片下載
色漫畫帝國sex888免費看影
拓網視訊交友
34c視訊網愛聊天室
xxx383美女寫真迷愛聊天
sex999免費影片兼職援交
辣妹視訊網
免費視訊78論壇
情色香港論壇
我愛78論壇情色情趣 商品
美女show-live視訊情色
美眉共和國080情人網
s383情色大網咖視訊
aaa免費看影片
kk777視訊俱樂部
小魔女影城
sexy diamond sex888入口
104免費成人情色文學小說
免費成人影片,g點
彩虹無碼av女優
成人免費視訊 完美女人
美女短片免費試看
tw33 影片交流
南台灣視訊網愛聊天室
sex888movie影城
18 禁亞洲名模瘋情
洪爺免費線上歐美A片段觀看
情人辣妹影片視訊直播
QQ美女視訊秀
hi5 tv免費影片sex貼片網
新浪視訊
日本視訊小魔女自拍
美女交友影音視訊聊天室
domain hilive.tv限制級
sex888免費看影片波霸美女寫真
love104影音live秀
甜心寶貝直播貼片自慰
捷克論壇
桃園援交小魔女自拍天堂
裸體高雄援交妹
gogo2sex桃園視訊妹
85cc情色視訊交友
視訊妹迷愛聊天
34c情人視訊網愛聊天室
南台灣視訊貓貓論壇
視訊美女
21sex美女視訊交友
34c美女寶貝視訊
免費a片線上觀看s383視訊
視訊交友90739,限制級,777美女dvd
免費成人影片,日本美女寫真集
080情人網,本土自拍貼圖
ut同志交友網
禁地論壇比基尼辣妹
dvd線上aa片免費看
show-live名模視訊
情人小魔女自拍
視訊自拍美女聊天室

4:33 AM, April 09, 2009  
Blogger 天天看正妹 said...

85cc免費影城aa的滿18歲影片85cc免費影片aaa免費看影片aaaaa片俱樂部影片免費 a 片85cc免費影片aa影片下載城微風成人av論壇免費a片aaa片免費看影片aaa片免費看短片小魔女免費影片免費視訊聊天 a片免費看a 免費影片觀賞免費視訊聊天室微風成人85cc免費影片85cc成人影城免費成人視訊亞洲禁果影城aa的滿18歲影片A片-sex女優王國aaaaa片俱樂部免費卡通影片線上觀看線上免費a片觀看A片-sex女優王國情色偷拍免費A片免費A片免費看 aa的滿18歲影片aaa影片下載城日本免費視訊av俱樂部後宮0204movie免費影片免費 a 片ut聊天室辣妹視訊情色美女視訊聊天室免費卡通影片線上觀看 ut交友成人視訊免費A片av1688影音視訊天堂aaa的滿18歲卡通影片s383情色大網咖視訊美女館aaaa 片俱樂部免費a片卡通aaaa片免費看影片aaa片免費看短片 杜蕾斯成人UT影音視訊聊天室 免費視訊78論壇免費aaaaa片俱樂部影片aaaa彩虹頻道免費影片aa影片下載城色漫畫帝國kk777視訊俱樂部美女視訊5278論壇ut聊天室aio交友愛情館免費視訊聊天成人a圖片區小說頻道彩虹頻道免費影片jp成人小魔女免費影城免費 aa 片試看情色文學A片-無碼援交東京熱一本道亞洲東洋影片gay片免費下載卡通aa片免費看成人影片分享小魔女免費影片視訊高雄情人聊天室34c卡通美女a片免費試看av免費影片,視訊聊天go2av免費影片情色 網站sex女優王國高中生援交偷拍自拍限制級色情 片plus論壇080情人網免費av影片免費a片卡通浪漫月光論壇免費aa片avdvd無碼影音視訊交友 免費視訊辣妹情人視訊網免費視訊辣妹 免費視訊78論壇台灣kiss情色貼圖區sex免費看影片彩虹論壇免費視訊聊天室 咆哮小老鼠分享論壇月宮貼圖色妹妹嘟嘟情人色網日本美女寫真集,kk視訊成人情色 視訊21sexsexy辣妹視訊百分百成人情色圖片ut辣妹哈啦視訊聊天室 素人自拍免費影片線上觀賞論壇男人的最愛中國性愛城avdvd無碼aaa免費看影片bt電影下載,免費成人片免費a片卡通dudu sex

4:33 AM, April 09, 2009  
Blogger 天天看正妹 said...

85cc免費影城aa的滿18歲影片85cc免費影片aaa免費看影片aaaaa片俱樂部影片免費 a 片85cc免費影片aa影片下載城微風成人av論壇免費a片aaa片免費看影片aaa片免費看短片小魔女免費影片免費視訊聊天 a片免費看a 免費影片觀賞免費視訊聊天室微風成人85cc免費影片85cc成人影城免費成人視訊亞洲禁果影城aa的滿18歲影片A片-sex女優王國aaaaa片俱樂部免費卡通影片線上觀看線上免費a片觀看A片-sex女優王國情色偷拍免費A片免費A片免費看 aa的滿18歲影片aaa影片下載城日本免費視訊av俱樂部後宮0204movie免費影片免費 a 片ut聊天室辣妹視訊情色美女視訊聊天室免費卡通影片線上觀看 ut交友成人視訊免費A片av1688影音視訊天堂aaa的滿18歲卡通影片s383情色大網咖視訊美女館aaaa 片俱樂部免費a片卡通aaaa片免費看影片aaa片免費看短片 杜蕾斯成人UT影音視訊聊天室 免費視訊78論壇免費aaaaa片俱樂部影片aaaa彩虹頻道免費影片aa影片下載城色漫畫帝國kk777視訊俱樂部美女視訊5278論壇ut聊天室aio交友愛情館免費視訊聊天成人a圖片區小說頻道彩虹頻道免費影片jp成人小魔女免費影城免費 aa 片試看情色文學A片-無碼援交東京熱一本道亞洲東洋影片gay片免費下載卡通aa片免費看成人影片分享小魔女免費影片視訊高雄情人聊天室34c卡通美女a片免費試看av免費影片,視訊聊天go2av免費影片情色 網站sex女優王國高中生援交偷拍自拍限制級色情 片plus論壇080情人網免費av影片免費a片卡通浪漫月光論壇免費aa片avdvd無碼影音視訊交友 免費視訊辣妹情人視訊網免費視訊辣妹 免費視訊78論壇台灣kiss情色貼圖區sex免費看影片彩虹論壇免費視訊聊天室 咆哮小老鼠分享論壇月宮貼圖色妹妹嘟嘟情人色網日本美女寫真集,kk視訊成人情色 視訊21sexsexy辣妹視訊百分百成人情色圖片ut辣妹哈啦視訊聊天室 素人自拍免費影片線上觀賞論壇男人的最愛中國性愛城avdvd無碼aaa免費看影片bt電影下載,免費成人片免費a片卡通dudu sex

4:33 AM, April 09, 2009  
Blogger 123456 said...

广州托盘复合托盘食品托盘天津木托盘胶合板托盘蜂窝纸托盘塑木托盘熏蒸木托盘木制托盘广东塑料托盘钢托盘钢制托盘栈板塑料栈板木栈板垫仓板托盘包装求购托盘天津托盘温州托盘山东托盘北京托盘上海木托盘塑胶托盘卡板纸卡板塑料卡板手推车推车机场手推车好孩子手推车液压手推车超市手推车医用手推车康贝手推车不锈钢手推车平板车电动平板车老虎车静音手推车平板手推车小推车模具架置物架堆垛架巧固架整理架物料整理架挂板架整理柜零件柜零件整理柜文件整理柜仓储笼仓库笼料箱塑料箱钢制料箱货箱整理箱塑料整理箱周转箱塑料周转箱防静电周转箱求购周转箱物流箱物料盒零件盒塑料零件盒卡板箱周转筐塑料周转筐周转箩登高车物流台车台车密集架档案密集架文件柜办公文件柜北京文件柜广州文件柜上海文件柜南京文件柜深圳文件柜钢制文件柜铁皮文件柜档案柜文件柜厂底图柜档案柜鞋柜储物柜更衣柜防火防磁柜防磁柜防火防磁文件柜图书架资料柜工具柜

4:58 AM, April 13, 2009  
Blogger 徵信 said...

外遇外遇外遇外遇外遇外遇外遇外遇外遇 外遇
外遇 外遇外遇 外遇 外遇
外遇 外遇 外遇
外遇


外遇 外遇
外遇
外遇 外遇外遇
外遇

外遇 外遇外遇 外遇 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 ,
外遇 外遇 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇外遇 外遇外遇 外遇 外遇

外遇 外遇

外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇劈腿劈腿劈腿劈腿劈腿劈腿劈腿劈腿喜帖囍帖卡片外遇外遇 外遇 外遇外遇 外遇
外遇 外遇 外遇 外遇剖析 外遇調查 外遇案例 外遇諮詢 偷情 第三者外遇話題 外遇發洩 感情挽回 徵信社 外遇心態 外遇 通姦 通姦罪 外遇徵信社徵信社外遇 外遇 抓姦徵信協會徵信公司 包二奶 徵信社 徵信 徵信社 徵信社 徵信社 徵信社 徵信 徵信 婚姻 婚前徵信 前科 個人資料 外遇 第三者 徵信社 偵探社 抓姦 偵探社 偵探社婚 偵探社 偵探社偵探家事服務家事服務家電維修家事服務家事服務家事服務家事服務家事服務持久持久持久持久持久持久持久離婚網頁設計徵信社徵信社徵信徵信社外遇離婚協議書劈腿持久持久持久持久持久劈腿剖析徵信徵信社外遇外遇外遇外遇徵信社徵信社徵信社徵信社徵信社徵信社徵信徵信社徵信徵信徵信徵信徵信徵信徵信徵信徵信徵信徵信徵信徵信徵信徵信徵信徵信徵信徵信徵信徵信徵信徵信徵信社徵信社徵信社徵信社徵信社徵信社徵信社徵信社徵信公會 徵信公會 徵信公會 徵信公會 徵信公會 徵信公會 徵信公會 徵信公會 徵信公會 徵信公會 徵信公會 徵信公會 徵信公會 徵信公會 徵信公會 徵信公會 徵信公會 徵信公會 徵信公會 徵信公會 徵信公會 徵信公會 徵信公會 徵信公會 徵信公會 徵信公會 徵信公會 徵信公會 徵信公會 徵信公會 徵信公會 徵信公會 徵信公會 徵信公會 徵信公會 徵信協會 徵信協會 徵信協會 徵信協會 徵信協會 徵信協會 徵信協會 徵信協會 徵信協會 徵信協會 徵信協會 徵信協會 徵信協會 徵信協會 徵信協會 徵信協會 徵信協會 徵信協會 徵信協會 徵信協會 徵信協會 徵信協會 徵信協會 徵信協會 徵信協會 徵信協會 徵信協會 徵信協會 徵信協會 徵信協會 徵信協會 徵信協會 徵信協會 徵信協會 徵信協會 徵信協會 徵信協會 徵信協會 徵信公會 徵信協會 徵信協會 徵信協會 徵信協會 徵信協會 徵信協會 徵信協會 徵信公會 徵信協會 徵信協會 徵信協會 徵信協會 徵信協會 徵信協會 徵信協會 徵信協會 徵信協會 徵信協會 徵信協會 徵信協會 徵信協會 徵信協會 徵信協會 徵信協會 劈腿 劈腿 劈腿 劈腿 劈腿 劈腿 劈腿 劈腿 劈腿 劈腿 劈腿 劈腿 劈腿 劈腿

9:56 PM, April 20, 2009  
Blogger 1314 said...

視訊做愛視訊美女無碼A片情色影劇kyo成人動漫tt1069同志交友網ut同志交友網微風成人論壇6k聊天室日本 avdvd 介紹免費觀賞UT視訊美女交友..........................

10:36 PM, May 19, 2009  
Blogger 1122 said...

免費A片 - 微風成人日本美女寫真集咆哮小老鼠影片分享區免費成人電影小魔女自拍天堂av1688影音娛樂網成人交友0204movie免費影片咆哮小老鼠論壇85cc免費影城85ccfoxy免費音樂下載成人視訊交友免費視訊免費影片成人影城免費a網 免費視訊辣妹彩虹頻道免費短片交友av1688天使娛樂網辣妹妹影音視訊聊天室小魔女免費影片色情聊天室 ut我愛78論壇

12:08 AM, June 08, 2009  

Post a Comment

<< Home