The Cigarette Smoking man was Mulder's father?

I've been getting more readers it seems and that makes me happy. Soooo, this time I'm actually going to agree with an opinion column in todays Collegian. It talks about smoking rights in public. Well, I'll just let you read it:

Reducing rights of smokers limits freedom for everyone

I can't take it anymore. All I'm looking for is a little relax-time to read The Daily Collegian, but every time I open the letters section I get nauseous ("Smokers violate basic rights given to all citizens in public," Feb. 21).

It makes me sick to hear another health nut whine about second-hand smoke in bars. You're not going to get lung cancer from a little smoke now and then. I think it is time for bar owners and smoking patrons in New York and other places to take back their rights to allow smoking if they wish.

The next thing will be cigarette smoke detectors in our homes to fine us for "our health's sake." If you have a problem with me smoking in a bar, let me know. I'll be sure to blow a nice cloud in your pretentious face.

Jeff O'Malley
graduate - aerospace engineering



I tend to agree with Jeff here. I am a conservative, as I'm sure you've all guessed by now. And in being a conservative there are a few things I like to see. One of them, is smaller government. There are some things I disagree with Jeff about and I'll get those out of the way first. Second-hand smoke causes cancer. Period. It is not good for you and does not benefit you in anyway. Also, If a bar owner in New York decides to ban smoking in his establishment, the Government, you and everyone else should keep their damn noses out of it. It is none of your business. You don't like it? Don't come back, go to a different bar where they allow smoking. HOWEVER, I do NOT agree with a county, state or federal law stating that an establishment should have to be smoke-free. That's ridiculus. I have to look up a little more about New York and Florida with their smoking bans because I'm not too sure where their legislature is coming from. Nonetheless, the people shall prevail against their government. As codename 'V' says, "People should not be afraid of their governments. Governments should be afraid of their people." I think this is a great example of where this should come into play. If you don't want laws passed prohibiting smoking in a bar or restaurant then write your representative. But if a bar owner takes it upon him/herself to ban smoking then that is their freedom. Jeff, though, at the end of his rant decides to be an asshole, saying, "If you have a problem with me smoking in a bar, let me know. I'll be sure to blow a nice cloud in your pretentious face.". That's just childish. There is a mutual respect that all people, to live together, must maintain. If Jeff did that to me in a bar, he'd have a high velocity Yuengling bottle to deal with. Seriously....WTF.

Personally, I hate smoking. I quit two years ago and ever since, cigarette smoke bothers the fucking hell out of me. I still go to bars but I try my hardest to stay away from the smokers. When me and my friends go out back in Pittsburgh, I bother the hell out of them about smoking and it's paid off. Most of them just strictly chew now, which I quit about a year ago, and wish I still did it because chew is God's gift to mankind. CSM is a badass.

Just a few words about gay martyrs.

This is going to relatively quick, I hope. I just finally sent in my letter to the editor about the mysterious gay-ene, let's hope it gets printed. Anyways, it seems the Collegian has been on a stint of publishing apologist gay letters. Here's another that I only have a few words about:

Gays fight tough opposition as a result of their lifestyle

After reading Esmond Crooke's letter, "Annual Kiss-OUT event not worth news coverage," Feb. 17, I thought it came at an interesting time. The Interfraternity Council/Panhellenic (Thon) took place this weekend and after seeing the kids and their families, one cannot imagine what it would be like to live a life filled with struggle and pain. Clearly, no one would choose to live a life like that -- it is accepted as being biological, not a choice or punishment. Being gay is no different in that no one chooses to be that way. Why would a person choose to live a lifestyle in which rejection and struggle are so familiar? Thinking someone chooses to be gay is like thinking someone chooses to have a serious disease. It is not a choice; it is the hand that life has dealt you.
The Kiss-OUT recognized those who continuously fight opposition their lives have brought them, just as Thon recognizes the kids who strive to fight battles life has dealt them. So, unless you criticize The Daily Collegian for glorifying Thon by providing it space on the front page, you should realize no one willingly chooses a life filled with pain and personal strife.

Erin Franks
sophomore - biological anthropology




We live in a world where anyone can be a martyr. Erin seems to think that gay people don't choose to live this life of strife and pain. I've gone over that already. What my biggest problem with this girl is her rather obscured view of the world. There are a few men and women called the UNITED STATES ARMED SERVICES. These people put their lives on the line so that we can be free. They choose this life. They live this life. They willingly choose this life. They are the martyrs of our nation. To even suggest that gay people are on that level (or anyone for that matter) is disgusting and childish.






The occasion of this photograph was a Veterans Day Commemoration at Dallas City Hall on 11 November 2004. The veteran pictured is Houston James, a survivor of the Japanese attack on Pearl Harbor in December 1941, and the Marine is Staff Sgt. Mark Graunke Jr., a member of an ordnance-disposal team who lost his left hand, one leg, and an eye while defusing a bomb in Iraq in July 2003.

That's so gay...

Ok. Those of you who know me may already be expecting something like this to be put up here. And those of you who don't know me are going to get a toned down version of a little thing I call 'gay'. Here at Penn State, we have a newspaper that claims to be the utmost "professional" outpost for the students....... They. Can. Not. Be. Serious. Fuck, just come out and say it! "We here at the daily collegian have a terrible bias towards the left." Fucking say it. If I could twist the proverbial arm, I would be doing that right about now. YESSSS. Read it bitches:

"Early childhood education should cover homosexuality

I have heard students from elementary school through college use the expression "That's so gay" as a response to just about anything. For many children and adolescents, this derogatory use of the word is the first understanding they have of a gay person.

For this reason, children in elementary school should learn about homosexuality as early as first grade when they begin to talk about family, and then again in fifth grade when they study the reproductive system. This might help children to grow up with a more accepting attitude toward gays if they are educated on homosexuality the way they are educated on other aspects of life, nature and the human body. For example, the following few simple statements could clear up a lot of confusion and misinformation: Homosexuality is not a choice; it's biologically determined. Homosexuality is not a disease. You can be friends with someone of the same sex who is gay and not be afraid that they will be attracted to you. There is nothing wrong with being gay, and there is no reason to be ashamed if you are gay.

If acceptance is taught in the curriculum, gay adolescents may have an easier time in elementary, middle and high school, and by the time they are in college, they will not hear students say, "That's so gay."

Lori Melfi
sophomore - secondary education"



YESSSSSSSS. Oh fuck, this is so full of garbage I may have to take two f/n trips. Alright, first of all. Gay means happy. Just so you all know. If anyone fucked up the word usage, its the people who coined the USAGE of "gay" to mean heterosexually challenged. Another term for a gay person is queer. Right? When people use the phrase, "That's so gay" is it not always in context with something thats rather, QUEER? Hmm. Thats odd now isn't it. Someone, I think, has their belt strapped on too tight. "That's so gay" is a perfectly liable phrase through the bastardization of our language (thanks in part to the Rap Community). So, I guess all I'm trying to say about that part of Lori's expose is, frankly, that it's pretty gay. Now. On to the real substance of her message, the REAL reason she wrote in. This is going to be FUN:

"elementary school should learn about homosexuality as early as first grade when they begin to talk about family". So, what would you teach our children about, Lori? Would you teach them that broken homes usually provide society with mal-adjusted teens and eventually adults? Would you teach them that a child needs both Mother (woman) and Father (man) to grow up with a healthy aspect on life and adjustment. No kid who grows up in a homosexual family is going to be normal. It is as plain as that. Gay "couples" should not be allowed to raise children. End of story. Thats all she wrote. If they want kids, they can be straight.

"and then again in fifth grade when they study the reproductive system.". Holy hell did she set herself up for this one. The glorious reproductive system. We all love it don't we. Apparently gays don't. Let's just get down to it shall we? The male's penis is meant for, and only for, one place in the female, which is the glorious vagina. And why might you ask? Soley to reproduce. I mean if we look at this straight-forward topic as a liberal would have it, we're all just animals anyways. Animals don't have sex other than to reproduce so my original hypothesis is correct. Penis=>Vagina. Look at the diagram and tell me what you see. A single male and a single female. There's a fucking reason for that folks. Its called biology. Man was meant, scientifically (which, in our liberal mindset, is the only thing that matters and is the utmost authority), for one other being, the Woman. And there you have it. Study it well. Ok, now to address the quote at hand. Lori, dear, what would you have us teach our impressionable children about homosexual reproductive systems? Should we be telling them that it is unnatural and ill-conceived? Should we tell them it is ok because it's sole purpose is PLEASURE. What then would become ok? Child pornography, beastiality (try explaining beastiality to a kid without naming names or pictures....sounds a bit like homosexuality, doesn't it????), polygamy? How could you refute their young inquiring minds? There is nothing wrong with any of those aforementioned practices due to the acceptibility of pleasure being the only reason why it is. The fact of the matter is that homosexuality does not fit with science! Then, I ask of you, where does it fit?

"Homosexuality is not a choice; it's biologically determined.". Fuck. I'm just gonna say it. This girl is lacking a brain. Only a dumbass would be so bold as to make that statement. What biological determinant impacts sexuality, Lori? The mysterious gay-ene? No. There is no such thing. There is no proof of that. Sticking with strictly science here folks, what, if there was a gene for homosexuality, would be its purpose? We all know, or at least those of us that are hetero, how to reproduce. If it is nature's intent to "sometimes" throw the gay-ene in there what should that tell you about how mother nature feels about that person. If they are incapable of feeling a desire for a woman (or man, depending on your gay sex) how then, are they capable of reproducing, like the rest of normal society? Is it truly mother nature's intent to weed out these individuals? If not, what would be her purpose to bastardize the gay-ene for the purpose of determining sexuality? We have opposable thumbs so we can manipulate objects, inner ear fluid to balance us, hair to keep us warm, perfectly tuned lenses in our eyes to precisely focus light, a system that regulates our body temperature (and one that even regulates the temperatur of our sperm), lungs that will heal themselves after quitting smoking, and a liver that regenerates itself. What is the gay-ene for then? Mental retardation is a biological problem that renders the individual incapable of doing many things. On levels, autism allows people to play music that no one thought was possible, or gives them the ability to read books and remember them line to line but impedes them from carrying on a normal conversation. These are all mother nature's tiny little screw-ups. There is no reason for them. What then, is the reason for the gay-ene and homosexuality if it was mother nature's intent, and if you can not find a reason, are you willing to agree that it is one of mother nature's screw-ups, one that is treatable? I think not. That would mean you would have to take on the opinion that there is something "wrong" with gay people. You would never do that. I suggest you think of the implications of your words before you decide to grace us with them.

I truly hope that she either drops out of school or changes her major because I can not honestly believe that someone of her caliber should be teaching our children. Seriously....WTF

Take some responsibility......

Today's collegian had an interesting opinion about Zero-Tolerance in school. Wait, I'll just let you read it:

Zero-tolerance punishments ineffective with young kids

Sarah Goldfarb's column on the six-year-old boy suspended from school for sexual harassment was excellent ("Young 'offenders' cannot grasp severity of sexual harassment," Feb. 10). The school system, instead of being "case sensitive," has zero-tolerance rules. That way no one (teachers, administrators, system lawyers) has to think. Hoist the ironic banner.

Gregory Eck
graduate - geographic information systems

Gregory is undoubtedly a liberal. I think that's obvious enough. And even if he's not, it doesn't really matter cause he's a Grad student, and most Grad student are sugary. And who can take them serious...Anyways. This Nation that has been bastardized and demoralized by the liberal media outfits (like MTV) and liberal judges that legislate from the fucking bench has allowed this lackadaisical approach to punishment. This "case sensitive" approach is a great example of the lack of self-responsibility. Now, I realize that some kids will act out and the need for a good talk is pertinent. But if we spend so much time trying to categorize everyone, nothing will get done. If you watch South Park you'll know what I mean. The episode when all the kids were diagnosed with ADD is much closer to truth than parody. Sometimes when you categorize kids you alienate them, and kids do not need that shit. They need someone with a good head on their shoulders, strong moral background and practice, who makes sure they show their love for them. What this nation has a problem with is realizing that some kids are just fucking bad. So what do you do? Make them take responsibility. If a kid steals something and you thouroughly let them know what they did was fucked up, they'll get the lesson. We got smacked when we did something back. Now you can go to jail for it. Get your fucking thumbs out of your asses and pay attention to your kids. Then maybe they won't be getting into trouble. Take some fucking responsibility. Want to know what else is wrong with kids these days. Rap. Seriously....WTF.

Here's Gregory's webpage: http://www.personal.psu.edu/users/g/b/gbe101/

Frats and Muslims

I have little time to write as I have a program to write and tons of reading for some dumb elective class. Nonetheless, I have at least two articles from today and yesterday I'd like to respond to. The first is about Frats. Now, let's get serious, if you know anything about me, the one thing you know is that I hate frat boys. Here's the article:

PSU students benefit from presence of greek groups

In response to Lori Koch's letter, "Greek students not lifeline to PSU, surrounding areas," Feb. 7, I'd like to make a point. OK, so greek life isn't a big deal to Penn State, yeah right.

How many parade floats would there be during the Homecoming parade if fraternities and sororities didn't team up to build them? How many people can say they never stepped foot in a fraternity to attend a social function? How many more people would be looking for housing if we didn't have fraternity houses? How much more money would non-greek organizations have to raise for Interfraternity Council/Panhellenic Dance Marathon to compensate for the money greeks raise?

The backbone affects the whole body, just as greek life affects the whole student body here at Penn State.

Adam Nygaard
freshman - nuclear engineering

Ok Adam. Let's set some ground rules. First, frats are for guys with homo-erotic persuasions. Secondly, getting girls drunk and essentially raping them does not mean you're straight. Ok, now that thats out of the way I can get on to his article. Greek life isn't a big deal to normal, moral people. Let's get serious, debauchery, sodomy and drunkeness are not essential to the college experience and to those with real majors, like yourself, it is not highly recommended. Now, I actually laughed aloud when I read "How many parade floats would there be during the Homecoming parade if fraternities and sororities didn't team up to build them?". Honestly, you can not actually believe that parade floats contribute to the academia that is supposed to be Penn State. Seriously. The social functions you talk about next are trivial, they provide nothing to Penn State, they and their homo-eroticism are not essential to the lifeline of Penn State. Your housing argument is ridiculus too. These boys that join frats do not join them because housing is tight, are you that dumb. They join for the camaraderie of like minded boys who have those "special" feelings tucked far back in their brains. The only good point you made was the reference to THON, and I agree. The fraternaties do make a good contribution through THON. And "the buck stops there". Penn State's backbone is not the fraternities, it is it's Academia. Someone should jedi-mind trick you frat-boys to ditch the hair dye, popped collars and Finance degrees and become men. But, I wouldn't expect that from the frats. I mean, they have beer to drink. Seriously....WTF.


Yes, the Religion of Peace strikes again. Apparently some people are more brain-dead than members of the ACLU, then again, this kid probably has a card:

Some European newspapers irresponsibly ran cartoons

The Daily Collegian's editorial, "Depictions of Muhammad: Violent response unwarranted by Islamic world," Feb. 7, missed one key point of this growing problem -- many European newspapers republished the cartoons after violence broke out. Some did this to simply show the public the cartoons, but some purposely did it as a slap in the face to Muslims.

While I in no way, shape or form condone the violent acts taking place throughout much of the Muslim world, I do understand the outrage many Muslims feel after their beliefs were mocked by some European newspapers. While these newspapers have a right to publish freely, they also have a responsibility to not publish any material for pure shock value, especially when they know there is a very good chance of violent repercussions.

The newspapers that did this bear some of the responsibility for the wave of protests and violence.

Ryan Lynch
senior - astronomy and astrophysics

Oh the outrage!! They're picking on the Muslims!! Those inconsiderate bastard imperialists. Oh come on people, they want you dead, they want your unborn dead, they want the fall of the western world for their theocracy. This newspaper ran a story that made fun of a religion, something that is not unheard of. How many times do you hear the old and tired "pedo" Catholic priest jokes on fucking TV. You don't see Catholics or protestants burning flags and mocked bodies out in front of the stations that air the jokes. Why then is it that we should be sympathetic with Islam when they, for all of modern history, sook out a way to further their agenda of "Kill all infidels". Ryan said, "especially when they know there is a very good chance of violent repercussions.", what kind of bullshit is that? Why is there a fucking good chance of violent repercussions? Why is it that we should bite our tongues when it comes to criticizing Islam for what we all know is true? Why is it acceptable for Islam to act out in violence and barbarism? These people are the bastard kids that no one wants to take care of so they just let them do as they please. Take a good look at that picture. Read those fucking signs. That is what Islam is becoming. "Behead those who insult Islam", "Europe, you will pay, your 9/11 is on it's way". Are these humans we are dealing with? There is a fucking little kid there. A little fuking kid who is not going to know anything other than "Behead those who insult Islam". What the fuck is wrong with these people? They are destroying whatever semblance of truth and peace their religion once had, if at all. And what is worse is that no one in power in Islam is speaking out. Do not be fooled by what you read in the newspapers, by what the ACLU would have you believe. Islam, clearly, does not want peace.


Islam wants the blood of the infidels and they will stop at nothing until they establish their racist theocracy, until the world bows to Mecca or forfeits their heads in its honor. Religion of peace. Seriously....WTF









(This image is of a man in Iraq who is kneeling over the body of a relative killed by muslim Iraqi insurgents. His relative was a member of the Iraqi gaurd, a group that is trying to free its country of the tyranny and terror that Islamofascists spread)

Another liberal dumbass strikes at the opinion column: Discrimination in the classroom...

YES, this one is going to prove itself worthy. After a minimal amount of research on our subject, I found something very interesting in his files on stalkersearch. tzb114@psu.edu, seems to think that the issue of abortion is hilarious, otherwise, what would be the reason for saving something so heinous? Anyways, Timothy will be spared of my abortion rant for now, but don't you readers worry, It will come in time. Anyways, back to the issue, Timothy wrote into the The Daily Collegian with the following letter to the editor:

"Discrimination comments show Republican beliefs

Once again, the College Republicans have amazed me with their flagrant hypocrisy. In a statement published in
The Daily Collegian Wednesday, Vicky Cangelosi stated that "Discrimination is discrimination," in reference to the supposed liberal bias in classroom settings ("UCLA alum offers money for proof of bias," Feb. 1).

However, isn't Cangelosi's political group affiliated with the party that believes in discrimination only when the Constitution explicitly spells it out? Indeed, she is. So who is she to talk about discrimination? United States Senate Republicans from every state scramble to ensure that discrimination policies remain etched in stone and do not expand to meet the times. But of all the discrimination debates, political discourse in an academic environment is not a form of discrimination.

Perhaps if the College Republicans had something remotely articulate to say in these classes, there could be real debate instead of this incessant whining. The College Republicans need to come back into reality where there is separation between what is actually discrimination and what is just a persecution complex.

Timothy Best
junior - biochemistry and molecular biology"


Timothy obviously is a dumb ass, as he has completely missed the whole point of the whole "discrimination" debate, but I wouldn't expect much more from a liberal. After all, they are dumb asses. His claim of Republican's sticking to the strict doctrine of the Constitution is more flattering than it is insulting once you realize that he has spoken out in error. What Timothy got wrong lies in what discrimination is being committed. He claims, "...political discourse in an academic environment is not a form of discrimination" which is a somewhat viable argument. If a teacher wants to explain the goings on of the political environment to his/her class, when applicable, they [professors] are welcome to. However, discrimination starts when students, when faced with a political bias spewing forth from their profs, makes them uneasy and worried about voicing their opinion for fear of academic retaliation. Sound far feched? Try again. I've heard many stories of students who had to falsify papers betraying their own opinions just because some liberal teacher would, and had, given them a worse grade for it [their true opinion] in the past. Most of these biases come up during the non-science/math classes that we are forced, as "academics", to take. You don't hear about how bad social security is when you're studying 3-phase power, which is why the sciences are great. Nonetheless, not all classes, I suppose, can be science classes and therefore we are forced to take the standard pre-reqs and it is in those classes that liberal professors try to work their magic. Timothy, unfortunately, is so close minded that he probably thinks this is an impossibility. However, being a dumb ass, he is clearly wrong. No one would care if a professor tried to bring a little politics into the class, asking for opinions of students and encouraging debate. Yet, when the students feel threatened by the professors' overwhelming political/homosexual/activist bias, the line must be drawn. Our friend Timothy clearly decided he wouldn't put on his thinking cap when he got out of bed and wrote that article. I can see how a liberal wouldn't think there was any bias in higher academics, because frankly, most of the teachers are liberals themselves. So maybe his ignorance is due to a lack of diversity. Now wouldn't that be something. As I've continued to say, the liberal motto is, "free speech for all, as long as we agree". Seriously....WTF!

(The Black Caucus made allegations last semester about the environment on campus not being conducive to learning do to "racial" tensions and discrimination. Sparked only by one incident of pure childishness, we we're forced to endure months of whining by the Black Caucus about said incident and the subsequent phantom climate. The liberals on campus backed them. What is different with the situation of political bias in the classrooms? Think about that one and write a comment.)

(I will, later, go on to discuss this phantom "racial" climate on campus and how I believe the whole ordeal about it was really just a stunt for leverage.)

What is wrong with college girls (note, not women!)...

The opinions over at The Daily Collegian really sucked today and bordered on eleven year old brain capacity. Yet, I somehow knew it would be like that. Sooooo, I've decided to write about something that has been bothering me deep inside for a little over a year now. So, let's say I'm walking to EE365 nice and early around noon. I take a right down Allen Street and make my way towards campus and the Willard building. However, I believe that I may have seen some strange people walking about, yet it could just be my imagination. As I near PSU I am sure I have seen it. Without a doubt, there are characters from Megaman walking around campus. I think you all know what I mean. Barring the obvious lack of the blaster and blue helmet, the girls walking around campus look like female Megamen. You may be wondering what I am referring to and I will tell you right now: UGG BOOTS AND SLINKY PANTS. What the fuck is going on here girls. These Ugg boots you all seem to have shopped for together are making you look like skinny little eskimo sluts. Then to top it all off you have the huge fucking sunglasses that you saw on some Hollywood coke-head that wears them to hide the huge dark circles and bags under her coked-out eyes. Seriously, did you all just get up one day together, have some fucked up conference with nothing but MTV playing and decide that you would wear these ugly-ass sunglasses. What the fuck. You look TERRIBLE. Absolutely terrible. Have you asked anyone what you look like? Like a slut welder that's wearing Megaman boots, baggy sleeping pants and a puffy fur lined jacket. You all look the same. You're almost as bad as the kids who listen to rap and can't make a rational decision on what to wear out of the house so they just watch the latest [insert retard rap star name here] video and march to the closet to get their ensemble ready. Seriously......WTF.

Dumb ass Liberals on Wiretapping....

I found this written in the opinion column of my campus' daily newspaper, the Daily Collegian. I think that is what the topic of this blog is going to be from now on, dumb ass comments in the opinion column and my responses (I'll also try to find pictures of the dumb asses on PSU's stalkersearch and maybe even facebook, which is gay by the way). I hope to update it daily. I suppose this is number one. Enjoy!


"President should adhere to FISA wiretapping regulations

In response to Gerard Rihl's letter, "Domestic wiretapping typical for government," Jan. 27, I think I speak for most of us "liberals" and even some conservatives when I say that I am all for the protection of our great nation in this "War on Terror."

However, I am also for the Constitution, its ideals, and the single most powerful notion that no one American is above the law. Not even President George Bush. So when I am told that the White House is authorizing wiretaps to "protect our freedoms," I am giving them a "big thumbs up." But when I find out that the White House is authorizing wiretaps without approval from the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA) court, then I have a problem. The FISA court was established to ensure that there is not an abuse of power with the National Security Agency. Even further, the FISA court is extremely lenient on wiretapping.

When FISA is ignored, Bush could be protecting our nation or he could be protecting his Republican interests. He could even be pulling a Richard Nixon and be intercepting Democratic Party communications. He could be listening to a cute girl's voice or he could be listening to guys in Iceland and laughing as he listens to how funny they sound. Without FISA, it's whatever tickles his pickle, really... and that terrifies me.

I wrote the Daily Collegian just a few minutes ago and this is what I sent in...

"In response to Jonathon Freezer's letter to the editor yesterday, I only have a few things to say. I seem to remember you and your "liberal" buddies, as you have deemed yourself, complaining and asking questions of our President to explain why we didn't know of the conspiracy to destroy the World Trade Center. During the President's speech last night, I believe he did a good job shoving your complaints about federal wiretapping. The terrorists who were responsible for the greatest tragedy in American history were communicating with Al-Qaeda on over-seas phone calls. Had we known about those calls, we wouldn't be missing 3,020 of our own citizens. Your problem clearly lies in the fact that the President who is in office right now is George W. Bush. You are of the same ilk that complains about everything the President does, good or bad. You are the finest example of partisan politics and ideologies. I truly believe your tinfoil hat is on too tight."

I think that's a pretty good response to a dumbass liberal like Jonathon Freezer. I mean, seriously, who does he think the President is going to wiretap? We have better things to do than to worry about who's receiving donations, or in the case of an illustrious democrat, blowjobs. We're not at war with the Democrats. We're not at war with ordinary citizens. We ARE at war with the Islamofascists who are and have been destroying the Middle East and who are hiding in our own country (and who got here through our open borders). He talks of this FISA court that is supposed to protect those who may be victim of improper and illegal wiretaps, regardless if they are commiting a crime. However, what he seems not to realize, illegal or not, if we're wiretapping some Islamofascist who is planing to terrorize our people and our Nations intrests and we stop him before hand, THAT'S A GOOD THING. Courts just hold things like this up. Don't get me wrong, I am not advocating illegal wiretaps on individuals who are or are not commiting crimes (drug rings, child pornographers ect...) but what I am advocating is trust in President who I think has made some good decisions on foreign relations (and again, don't get me wrong, I know he's not perfect). We are wiretapping foreign calls of suspected terrorists. If you have nothing to hide, then quite bitching. Oh ya, here's a link to his SETI@Home profile, sorry but there's no picture of said dumb ass. http://setiathome.berkeley.edu/view_profile.php?userid=969561