An Opinion Piece On A Controversial Topic

Intentionally provocative summary of Opinion Piece, perhaps posed as a question? Click here to find out!

No doubt you will have noticed that Issue has been in the news lately, due to the scandalous behaviour of Public Figure, and the controversial comments of Publicity-Hungry Commentator. The editor of this site and I were discussing the Issue just the other day, and we agreed that making a glib reference to that discussion at the start of this piece would add a sense of authority to my authorial voice, as well as suggesting that the site upon which this piece is being published shares my opinionated stance on this Issue.

I was inspired to write this piece by Currently Fashionable Polemicist, who summarised the Issue better than I could when they said “oversimplification that makes me feel smart”. I have a strong opinion on this Issue, and my sharing it with you at this time is in no way attributable to opportunism on my part, due to the Issue’s sudden prominence in the news cycle. I haven’t exaggerated my position in the interests of raising my public profile, and here I am casually dropping in a reference to a long-ago instance that proves I have cared about the Issue for longer than you.

Unflattering photo of Public Figure

Unflattering photo of Public Figure

The Establishment Of Authority

I am an important person. You know this because I subtly mentioned, during the casual reference to a long-ago instance, that I was chair of an obscure sub-committee of some sort. You haven’t heard of the sub-committee in question, but I’m going to mention an esteemed public figure here in such a way as to imply that they too were involved with said sub-committee, though in fact they were not.

In case you think that I have taken a knee-jerk stance without giving the Issue due consideration, I used The Google to do some research while I was writing this Opinion Piece. I’m sure you’ll agree that a single reference to the findings of Ideologically-Driven, Ethically-Dubious Lobby Group With Questionable Funding Practices is very interesting, and adds a veneer of rigour to this whole piece. Furthermore, when you take those findings and draw wild conclusions, you will understand why I’m shoehorning in a reference to a bitter media spat from quite a while ago that I’m quite clearly still upset about.

I also have a deeply personal and sad experience, which I will bring up here to invalidate your objections — even though it doesn’t inform my argument or actually have anything much to do with the Issue at all. This deeply personal and sad experience of mine means that you are a horrible person if you raise any objections. If you too have a deeply personal and sad experience pertaining to the Issue, I will adopt a tone of sympathy. If you disagree with me, I will affect sympathy while implying that you are feeble-minded for allowing your feelings to cloud your judgement.

I have now established my authority.

Surprising Digression

I didn’t really plan this piece out in advance, so this is a rather large digression into another area of discussion altogether that I seem to have conflated with Issue. Am I so obsessed with this unrelated issue that I see it everywhere? Am I struggling to reach the word limit? Are these rhetorical questions actually an effective means of furthering my argument? Or is it obvious that I am using rhetorical questions to introduce points that I know are weak, playing the plausible-deniability card of ‘just putting it out there’?

Unattributed stock photo that isn’t really relevant to this article.

Unattributed stock photo that isn’t really relevant to this article.

Perhaps I really believe that these two issues are related. Due to my opaque reasoning, it’s quite hard to tell.

Pre-emptive Attack On Anyone Who Might Disagree With Me

If you disagree with me on the relationship between this issue and the one at hand, here’s a false equivalence comparing the Issue to slavery, or Nazism, or some other horrific historical example that is tremendously irresponsible of me to bring up in a poorly-researched opinion piece. Since your head is spinning at the flights of logic I’ve been taking, here’s an extended simile that will drive my point home like a flock of seagulls devouring the remnants of a box of fish ‘n’ chips, left on the beach by a careless citizen: I am the flock of seagulls; this publication is the sky; the Issue is the newspaper on which the fish ‘n’ chips are spread; Australia is the sand; Alan Jones is the battered flake; and you are the chips.

A seagull yesterday.

A seagull yesterday.

People that disagree with me on this Issue have said “selective quotation” and “quote taken out of context”. Though it’s tempting, I won’t take the moral high ground by pretending not to make sordid implications about the personal lives of these people while doing just that. Instead, I will construct a straw-man, and assume that the handful of people that I have misquoted above speak for everybody that disagrees with me on the Issue, even those with moderate views who hold valid concerns about my unhinged-and-seemingly-rooted-in-personal-interest zealotry regarding the Issue.

You might have noticed that I have spent more time attacking the hypothetical positions of my opponents than actually clarifying my own position on this Issue. I will grant you that tiny concession, hypothetical-reader-with-whom-I’m-carrying-on-a-conversation, but you have failed to take into account that, prior to submitting this article, I also found some statistics. It’s basically checkmate.

You must be feeling pretty silly for disagreeing with me.

Author byline with impressive achievements, a plug for a recent publication, and a lot of loaded buzzwords.

For more pieces like this, follow us on Facebook.



  1. Schooey says:

    Outraged comment attacking one specific line in the article while ignoring the article’s message as a whole. My anecdote about The Issue is the exact opposite to yours, and you should take your [left/right]-wing views back to [the ABC/2GB]

  2. Chay MacTavish says:

    Disagreement with the article and/or your opinion that makes it clear I did not read the whole thing, followed by a derogatory suggestion that you prefer sexual partners that are the same gender as you.

  3. Matt Roden says:

    Do not understand why you wrote about this Issue, when this other Issue exists.

  4. Elmo Keep says:

    Derailing comment about something not even vaguely related to The Issue.

  5. Elmo Keep says:


  6. Steph Harmon says:

    this is wrong

  7. Steph Harmon says:

    Comment reacting to the entire Opinion Piece that has been misplaced as a sub-comment.

  8. Eliza Cussen says:

    The Sharp-Paul rule: the comments on an article about issue justify issue.

  9. Regan says:

    Attempt to make the Issue related to the one I’m always trolling the comments section about. Repeat said trolling comments.

  10. Ketan Joshi says:

    Obviously you are in the pay of Big [industry], and as such, I don’t know how [publisher] can allow you to speak in public about [topic you wrote on].

    Even though you quote [expert] on [topic], everyone with common sense knows that [lie that I just made up] is true.

    This chart shows that I am right

  11. Mark says:

    The author has a pretentious beard and now I will assume the role of the teacher, award this a failing grade, and ask that you see me after class.

  12. Elmo Keep says:

    The Issue killed my parents.

  13. Alasdair Duncan says:

    Snarky reminder to check your privilege.

  14. Alasdair Duncan says:

    Angry ‘comment’ that misuses ‘inverted commas’.

  15. Alasdair Duncan says:

    Wake up, sheeple.

  16. Nic Smythe says:


  17. Chay MacTavish says:

    What he said.

  18. alan_v says:

    Comment offering my sincere personal gratitude to the writer of this article, to whom I refer to by their first name.

  19. alan_v says:


  20. alan_v says:

    Something about my tax dollars.

  21. alan_v says:

    reaction gif

  22. A.H. Cayley says:

    Comment attacking commenter for their derailing comment, derailing things further.

  23. Caketin Welsh says:

    ^^^ THIS.

  24. Leslie Hammond says:

    Take the bait. Respond angrily to trolling comment thereby derailing the entire comments thread such that no subsequent comment bears any relationship to the subject of the original opinion piece.

  25. Elmo Keep says:


  26. Caketin Welsh says:

    Comment patronisingly expressing sympathy for your experience with the Issue, before pointing out that your direct experience of the Issue cannot be taken into account by anyone ever because your perception of the Issue is Clouded by your Emotions and is therefore not valid.

  27. Elmo Keep says:

    Perhaps you would benefit from reading this?

  28. Caketin Welsh says:

    Comment blaming The Breakdown Of The Family Unit ie. Single Mothers for The Issue, even (particularly) if The Issue itself primarily affects Single Mothers

  29. Matt Roden says:

    Having an opinion that is neither particularly for or against article, just want to be listened to.

  30. Matt Roden says:

    Repeating an opinion that is neither particularly for or against article, just want to be listened to. In every thread.

  31. Matt Roden says:

    Still repeating an opinion that is neither particularly for or against article, just want to be listened to. In every thread.

  32. Tim Hardaker says:


  33. Regan says:

    Accuse you of not knowing what you are talking about and demand you back up your claim. Engage in an extended “evidence” war with you, which involves a to-ing and fro-ing of links bearing decreasing relevance to the topic at hand.

  34. Matt Roden says:

    Still repeating an opinion that is neither particularly for or against article, just want to be listened to. In every thread. Over and over.

  35. Simon Collinson says:

    Misogynistic riposte about men being the real victims of sexism.

  36. Matt Roden says:

    It is insane to be still be repeating an opinion that is neither particularly for or against article, as by now everyone has read it.

  37. Luke Ryan says:

    Comment consisting of gushing thanks for being brave enough to write article, followed by suggestion that Author should read my Blogspot post about completely unrelated controversial topic – probably something to do with misogyny in Ducktales – with attached URL.

  38. AxlProse says:

    Comment relating to @mattroden:disqus’s point that he raised in every other thread, but which he fails to see here, tying it into the piece’s contention and making him sound as smart as the author.

  39. Simon Collinson says:

    Counter-troll coupled with claim to moral high ground.

  40. Alasdair Duncan says:

    Friend’s Name

  41. Leslie Hammond says:

    Post said irrelevant link: and cause formatting of comments to become perilously narrow to the point where pretty soon it won’t even be worth bothering to read them.

    Demand that YOU back up YOUR claim before even ASKING me to back up mine!

  42. Luke Ryan says:

    Classic lefty, latte-sipping ABC bias! You have no idea what it’s like in the Real Australia!

  43. Matt Roden says:

    Isn’t it just typical of a political party that I assume you all vote for to be sitting on the internet arguing about this Issue instead of getting out into the world and trying to solve this Issue. Seriously, you [direction] wing idiots make me sick. Grow up and get out into the sunshine and asylum seekers/boat people [please circle whichever is more appropriate to my rant].

  44. ha8hfesdhsa[dhf says:

    Broken one line response after mini-essay was lost when the website timed out after the first try to post it. I hadn’t saved it into notepad.

  45. alan_v says:


  46. Matt Roden says:

    Thankyou for finally acknowledging my non-opinion but you missed the point entirely, I was actually saying repeat whatever it was I posted 17 times earlier.

  47. Chad Parkhill says:

    Casual threat to rape author if and only if author is a woman.

  48. Regan says:

    Well of course this is the leading authority on the issue and if you had any idea at all what you’re talking about you’d know that.

  49. David_Hollingworth says:

    Completely failed and ignorant attempt at firsty.

  50. Simon Collinson says:

    Snarky comment that your evidence is irretrievably tainted by _____gate.

  51. Chad Parkhill says:

    One-upmanship in oppression Olympics by reminding privilege-checker to check their own privileges, with casual use of the word “shitlord”.

  52. Leslie Hammond says:

    Invoking Godwins law. You lose, you *insert opposing political party here* stooge!

  53. Chad Parkhill says:

    Overly long diatribe inadvertently truncated after reaching character lim

  54. solwat says:

    Accidentally approved spam and other secrets big companies/ suburban mother/scientists don’t/do/are baffled that you know at this suspicious link for only $5.99

  55. Simon Collinson says:

    Invitation to join Ponzi scheme whereby you earn $6000/$9000/$12000 an hour/day/week from your computer/home/jail cell.

  56. Steph Harmon says:


  57. Chad Parkhill says:

    Link to legitimate online vendor of cheap Cial1s.

  58. Simon Collinson says:

    Absurdly angry diatribe about comment system, mistakenly posted here rather than on Slate.

  59. Alex McClintock says:

    Comment on what passes for “journalism” (always in inverted commas) these days

  60. Edward Sharp-Paul says:

    Author picking low-hanging fruit by responding to the commenter with the weakest argument. Offers a condescending ‘clarification’ of some minor point, failing to consider that maybe a thousand word piece offered ample scope to ‘clarify’ said minor point. ‘Infuriating’ use of inverted commas.

  61. Elmo Keep says:


  62. yerknickers says:

    Unnecessary Godwin.

  63. Eliza Cussen says:

    Reminder to the author to check his/her gender/race/sexuality privilege in regards to issue.

  64. Chad Parkhill says:

    This comment has been removed because it breaches Site’s Community Policy. For more information, please see our FAQ.

  65. Simon Collinson says:

    Less eloquent version of exact point made dozens of times elsewhere in comments.

  66. Elmo Keep says:

    Author repeatedly enters comments to point out that readers have en masse completely missed the point of their article which is somehow not the fault of the writer. Writer then restates position several times.

  67. Eliza Cussen says:

    Rant about the Republican Party by an American who got lost.

  68. The Shovel says:

    Comment not related to the one above, but posted as a reply so that it’s displayed closer to the top.

  69. Chay MacTavish says:

    [Sarcastic comment]

  70. The Shovel says:

    I actually know the esteemed public figure you mentioned in the article (I met him once) and I’m going to refer to him by first name. He’s not at all like you’d expect. And here’s an unrelated anecdote.

  71. Guest says:


  72. Matt Briody says:

    Pedantic disagreement with the first predicate of the first premise of your argument, based upon which the remainder of the article is not worth reading.

  73. A.H. Cayley says:

    No, maybe YOU would benefit form reading some [writers covered in first year philosophy], [pop feminists who have strayed really far from the central cause], or Dawkins, you uneducated IDOIT!!!!!

  74. Elmo Keep says:

    Well maybe YOU could benefit from a course of CHILL THE SHIT OUT, LADY, and probably you need A GOOD ROOT though in fact I am talking about myself but THIS ISN’T ABOUT ME.

  75. A.H. Cayley says:


  76. Julian Murphet says:

    Lead with circumstantial ad hominem parenthesis on ‘impressive’ author’s byline. Tu coque. Quick move to a lengthy statement of aghast incredulity. Now a goalpost-moving red herring to keep readers even more aghast. Pincer move of a false dilemma. Reductio ad absurdum with flashings of question-begging. Majestic affirmation of the consequent. Non sequitur, intuition pump, and anyway people, No True Scotsman. Argumentum ad baculum. Special pleading my way to the finish-line, but not before a last savage dose of flaming straw man!

  77. Jody Macgregor says:

    Comment that just says “tl;dr” written by someone who has never used a semi-colon in any other context in his life.

  78. Adam Snow says:

    personal message to the author posted by an older relative who doesn’t understand how the internet works

  79. citizen_cam says:

    Comment blaming Tony Abbott for everything.

  80. Alan Jesu Parry says:

    *Maintains circlejerk*

  81. reasonablehank says:

    Posts fringe counter-argument to Ms Joshi, mistaking him for a female; just like in other articles where I attacked her stance. Is not stalking her.

  82. Bill says:

    Comment unrelated to the article for the purpose of trolling another commenter from a different thread. (Aside attributed to an imaginary editor – Ed)

  83. Derek Fish says:

    Thoughtless trolling followed by simultaneously making racist comments and comparing Author and Readers to Hitler and the Nazis.

  84. Cassandrus says:

    *** {Comment deleted by Moderator for attempt to introduce relevance}

  85. Alistair Erskine says:

    Forthright and praiseworthy summary of all the opinions in the comments to date, lambasted as a pointless “Bump” 20 hours after the initial comments.

  86. fractious says:

    Smug, tendentious and misinformed comment that attempts to prove previous commenter has not the first clue what ad hominem really means, ultimately blowing it by use of ad hominem.

  87. fractious says:


  88. fractious says:

    Completely pointless repetition of asinine aphorism attributed to an American almost no-one has ever heard of so as to make it look like I don’t just know all about philosophy but am also Far Cleverer Than You Are.

  89. Steven Durrington says:

    Sycophantic cheerleading of above point.

  90. Steven Durrington says:

    *Eye Roll* followed by condescending reflection on how long it took to see Godwin’s Law in action.

  91. Guy Longfoot-Finch says:

    Objection to comment which may or may not be sexist or misogynistic though unrelated but probably written by tony abbott in futilely attempted disguise

  92. Deanne says:

    Religious propaganda and warning about divine retribution.

  93. actuallyreadthewholearticle says:

    Fairy reasonable comment that will be ignored or voted down.

  94. Heartfulla Napalm says:

    Comment in which I request to produce the writer’s offspring.

  95. mausium says:

    replies to author creepily mentioning their name over and over as if we’re pals.

    why are you doing this to me, author. this is just like you

  96. mausium says:

    rant about SJWs and the tumblrcracy

  97. mausium says:

    restatement of 400BC Socratic rants about how society is going to hell this generation not like my last generation which was the best

  98. Disqus1000 says:

    An angry comment on how this site allows a comment field for this article but does not open for comments on another potentially more controversial article on same site. Followed by insinuation of censorship/hidden agenda/bias/conspiracy.

  99. dtobias says:

    Needs a more click-bait-worthy headline. I suggest “6 Astounding Reasons You Must Support This Thing You Wouldn’t Have Believed!”

  100. kaibeezy says:

    Grammar-nazi making a legitimate grammar correction, then saying “I don’t want to be *that* guy”, then being that guy, and then making a grammar error.

  101. Mordicai says:

    Note that this was going to be my comment but you “stole” the idea.

  102. Mordicai says:

    Further objection to note that sometimes bad things happen to men, too, you know!

  103. DreadPirateZed says:


  104. Tynam says:

    Attempt to object to misogyny; downvoted into oblivion.

  105. ❤ Purseonality ❤ says:

    An abbreviation that indicates I found your article too lengthy and therefore did not take the time to read it thoroughly.

  106. James says:

    Worthless comment regarding my estranged cousin who managed to earn $X-thousand per month just by working from her ambiguously-located computer. My message implies “from home” but I may be alluding “to a corporate office.”

  107. ❤ Purseonality ❤ says:



  109. BENGAZZEY, even though it has nothing to do with the Issue at hand, but insisting that current Issue is somehow obscurely related, and that we’re all going to have our Constitutional rights revoked because of Issue Conspiracy.

  110. Troll comment, just to inflame opinions.

  111. dtobias says:

    Whine about Britishisms like ‘inverted commas’ where people should use the good ol’ Americanisms like ‘quotation marks’.

  112. dtobias says:

    Reply without any particular opinion either, just to say ‘look at me too!’

  113. dtobias says:

    Whine about how last poster used all caps and is hence shouting.

  114. dtobias says:

    Citation of Godwin’s Law.

  115. dtobias says:

    Attempt to get in the last word after that last person.

  116. dtobias says:

    Complaint about the homophobia implied with the rapes being confined to cross-gender.

  117. dtobias says:

    Link to article in A Voice For Men debunking the idea that misogyny exists.

  118. dtobias says:

    Opinion that My Little Pony is vastly better than that hackwork Ducktales.

  119. Pointless infographic about your tax dollars.

  120. Guest says:


  121. dtobias says:

    Irrelevant quote from Bible/Koran/Book of Mormon/Atlas Shrugged.


  123. fractious says:

    Predictably supercilious comment containing html text that links to Dunning-Kruger wikipedia page

  124. Self-important rant about how grammar usage in one sentence was off, thereby derailing the Issue and rendering the opinion completely and utterly useless.

  125. Christopher Peruzzi says:

    Conservative comment maid without using spelcheck.

  126. fractious says:

    Claim your graph is completely erroneous and betrays your inherent [direction] wing bias, followed by long-winded rant based on unsound generalisations about “your sort” that devolves into …[word limit]

  127. richjohnston says:

    Message plugging my own website, even though it’s not even tangentially related to the issue at hand, because i want traffic and don’t want to pay for an ad.

  128. Detailed
    snark about writer’s chosen political affiliations, with veiled claims
    that he’s “on the take” and therefore incapable of being objective about
    [poor formatting suggests that above detailed snark was simply cut-and-pasted from the Facebook comment thread, and subsequent attempts to edit rendered

  129. fractious says:

    … hysteria [continues for two further replies]

  130. Troll snark about how the above website is a complete scam and waste of time, and the author should be thrown in jail for life!

  131. dtobias says:

    Reply feeding the troll.

  132. fractious says:

    Disparaging reply about Americanisms, including specious arguments on origin of correct spellings of English language leading to insertion of pet rant about collapse of cultural diversity because of global dominance of American “culture” (including sarcastic use of inverted commas)

  133. Smug accusation that Author’s credentials have been faked because I was there and saw the whole thing and have a string of advanced degrees to back up my claim, even though they’re irrelevant to Issue.

  134. Ridiculously long and involved argument involving circular logic, and often no logic at all, but lots of big words and links to PDF files involving spurious research… and the inevitable link to a “fact checking” site that is in fact nothing but a link farm for pay but plays right into my obscure nonlogic.

  135. Insulting comment about how previous post is derailing the intelligent commentary about the issue, and why the previous poster shouldn’t be concerned with the link-bait headline, but the Issue itself, concern troll ad infinitum ad nauseum.

  136. Calmly insinuating that the above poster likely has a great deal of experience enjoying carnal relations with other species.

  137. Pictures of beautiful girls! [eastern European or Asian] women waiting for you!

  138. fractious says:

    Nauseatingly smug “observations” steeped in confirmation bias about how rapidly comment threads descend into troll-fests, flame wars and spam links. Imply I am somehow above all that, conclude with hand-wringing about parlous state of debate on the internet and weren’t we all nicer to each other when we debated face-to-face.

  139. Craig Bamford says:

    Irrelevant spam about local moms, angry doctors, and making implausible amounts of $$ per hour. W O RDS S PACE D ODD L Y TO E V ADE FIL TERS.

  140. lankyjoe says:

    incohate invectiveforsakking grammer spelling puntuation to assertion ov strongly ignorant conviction for sumthing unintelligble insult

  141. Entirely saccharine comment, coupled with pithy quote from ancient sage.

  142. dtobias says:

    Ex****ive del***d by d**ned bowdler**ation of the com**nting sy*tem.

  143. dtobias says:

    Reply to myself to get another last word.

  144. dtobias says:

    The same tedious reply that was given to the last six times you posted that.

  145. dtobias says:

    Whine about how political correctness is running amok these days.

  146. dtobias says:

    Link to some great brony fanfic I forgot to post in the last reply.

  147. dtobias says:

    Note that Barack Hussein Obama is the antichrist and is responsible for all the evil in the world, even stuff that happened before he was born (in Uganda, probably).

  148. Bill Greuling says:

    Solicitous observation that Author would not hold such bizarre opinions and/or engage in such frail logic and faulty reasoning if only he/she had matriculated from third grade and were a normal human of this planet with two biological parents instead of three.
    Not only that, but Marezey Doats and Akiddely Tivytu ran the definitive study on this topic and published the paper that Author plagiarized but did not refer to.

  149. dtobias says:

    Snark about how the poster misspelled “grammar” while ranting about others’ language skills.

  150. fractious says:

    Assert that Doats & Tivytu (1963) hypothesis proven to be false. Cite untested data, one paper by DeGeneres E. & Winfrey O. (2001) (behind paywall). Sarcastically question your knowledge of current theories in [insert obscure field of study]

  151. fractious says:

    Fundamentalist Screed About Sin Of Bearing Children Out Of Wedlock Citing Verses Of Sacred Book Taken Out Of Context.

  152. Why Can’t We All Just Get Along, coupled with inevitable treacly emoticons.

  153. You people in the insane [other direction] wing! You’ll believe anything you read on the interwebz, won’t you? Don’t you know that you’re being lied to? Check this for PROOF that you are full of fecal matter!

  154. garrettepps says:

    Rage that author has ignored Benghazi, Fast & Furious, sins of GW Bush administration, and drones.

  155. Local Scrutinizer says:

    Remark about Godwin’s Law.

  156. Astragali says:

    Deliberately inflammatory comment, soon to be followed by weak, yet frantic, backpedalling involving claims of account being hacked by sibling/dog/The Gubmint.

  157. Mark Fitzgerald says:

    Comment expressing bemusement over previous comments because this is OBVIOUSLY satire, not a serious piece. I’m smarter because I get it and you fell for it.

  158. Local Scrutinizer says:

    Assertion that Goodwin’s law is not in and of itself a logical fallacy. And ironically, it’s basically a logical fallacy to discount someone who is comparing a Hitler-like person or action to Hitler.

  159. Local Scrutinizer says:

    Ron Paul in 2020!

  160. Local Scrutinizer says:

    READ JOHN 3:16

  161. Local Scrutinizer says:


  162. Local Scrutinizer says:

    That graph is offensive, sir. There should be a law against this. Think of the children.

  163. Local Scrutinizer says:

    But without (The Controversial Topic), who would build the roads???

  164. NormDeplume720 says:

    You have ended your sentence with a preposition, and therefore have forfeited your right to an opinion about anything at all.

  165. Local Scrutinizer says:

    Overly personal comment from guy who sent a looooong complementary e-mail to the author last month, the author wrote back “Thanks”, and now the guy thinks he’s good friends with the author. Includes offers to collaborate with the author.

  166. Local Scrutinizer says:

    Comment invoking commenter’s military service, and how previous commenter has no right to comment here because this commenter “fought for (my countrymen’s) freedoms.”

  167. Local Scrutinizer says:

    Counter-comment saying “If you fought for my freedoms, apparently you didn’t do a very good job.”

  168. Local Scrutinizer says:

    (Death threat from military commenter and invoking of “hippie puke” followed by profanity.)

  169. Local Scrutinizer says:

    Loooooong comment frequently using the word “sir” to seem respectful while spewing an ad hominem trade against lankeyjoe.

  170. Local Scrutinizer says:

    Reply that the rule about never ending a sentence with a preposition has no logical or grammatical basis, and is only based on pet peeve of Noah Webster’s that no one had mentioned before him, and people took it as gospel because he was the guy who published that century’s last word on how to use words.

  171. Local Scrutinizer says:

    *Eye Roll* followed by condescending reflection on how there are already three mentions of Hitler and four comments on Goodwin’s law about 65 posts higher up. And astonishment that Steven and Derek didn’t see them, because person making this comment thinks his feisty comment about Goodwin’s law six hours ago was so important that he can’t believe people didn’t read all 185 comments here to find it.

  172. Local Scrutinizer says:

    Comment about how “meta” this article is, by someone very proud of the fact that they recently learned the word “meta.”

  173. Local Scrutinizer says:

    Thank you for the good writeup. It in fact was a

    amusement account it. Look advanced to more added agreeable from you!

    By the way, how can we communicate? (>link to porn site in Russian)

  174. Local Scrutinizer says:

    (Russian porn site gave you an un-stoppable virus and becomes your permanent home page. Reformat hard drive.)

  175. debumishra says:

    I refuse to be drawn into this debate. Interestingly, you have chosen not to divulge who is the careless citizen.

  176. Local Scrutinizer says:

    What’s with all the stupid comments from idiots in (Country A)?

    –Guy from Country B who assumes article was written by person from Country B but was actually written by person from Country A

  177. fractious says:

    Anti-war diatribe, “evil warmonger” catcalls, unwarranted allusions to [infamous military dictatorship].

  178. Local Scrutinizer says:

    Assertion from person with nothing better to do than comment all night on the Internet that “all these losers here should step away from the computer and get some sunshine and fresh air.”

  179. Local Scrutinizer says:

    Reply from third commenter discussing the idea that only some wars are justified, the last one in (commenter’s country) was over 200 years ago, blissfully unaware that he’s commenting to someone who isn’t from his country and doesn’t know its history.

  180. skinsidedown says:

    You’re obviously a fan of [insert politician] who is single handedly ruining this country.

  181. fractious says:

    Counter-argument whose central premise confuses correlation and causation.

  182. Tothe says:

    Spam offering most excellent prices on popular garments or fashion accessories from my highly exclusive store at blatantscamsite.url

    [stock image here]

  183. Disqus1000 says:

    Comentário em uma linguagem não-Inglês, que é único propósito é reunir votos de falantes de mesma língua.

  184. Mordicai says:

    I’ve noticed you have other profiles connected to your commenter ID so now I will start dropping creepy details from your real life into my reply in an effort to intimidate you.

  185. Mujokan says:

    Tangentially related quote from Futurama.

  186. Charlie Primero says:

    Gray text on white background. No.

  187. Caleb Garner says:

    Comment removed due to poor rating

  188. Caleb Garner says:

    Venemous attack that puts all blame on current president in office

  189. Louis Guertin says:

    Expected comment about getting along and needless insults.

  190. dtobias says:

    Going one level of meta further by replying to the meta-meta-comment.

  191. dtobias says:

    I refuse to debate either, which is why I’m replying indignantly to your posts.

  192. dtobias says:

    Counter-counter argument that applies the same sort of confusion, only assuming the causation to be in the opposite direction, with just as little proof.

  193. Stefan Nilsson says:

    Agreeing with author about [issue] and just wants everyone to know that author and commenter agrees with one another. Therefor if author had written something good about [issue] that means commenter is smart/good as well. All of this is however to long to write so commenter only posts


  194. dtobias says:

    Pedantic note that that American didn’t actually say the quote in the first place, but it actually originated with a different American almost no-one has ever heard of, and there’s a Snopes article debunking the belief that it originated with the other person because it’s been getting forwarded so much in emails.

  195. dtobias says:

    Rant about how Internet articles are almost unreadable because of all the annoying intrusive advertising they try to shove at you, ignoring the fact that this particular article doesn’t actually have any.

  196. Ben Sakker Kelly says:

    Facile comment about how all political parties are as bad as each other because none of them will adopt my extreme, ill-thought out solution. Sanctimonius tone implying that I am the arbiter of all truth and ethics.

  197. Louis Guertin says:

    Intolerant remark regarding the use of FOREIGN (after 5 attempts to write this word correctly) language on an English website.

  198. Louis Guertin says:

    Comment indicating that this opinion piece corroborates a plethora of conspiracy theories related to 9/11, the Illuminati, the Priory of Sion, George W. Bush and Obamacare.

  199. wolfshades says:

    Comment being offered, ostensibly in praise of the wonderful covering of the Issue, but with sidebar unrelated intent, to introduce my own event. And perhaps to invite all readers to my page to validate me as the attention whore that I am.

  200. mem_somerville says:

    How can you NOT have seen [this YouTube documentary] about this topic, and failed to mention it in your piece???? This documentary is totally unbiased, unlike you.

  201. Mujokan says:

    Piggyback comment on much earlier high-visibility comment, which has nothing to do with what I am ostensibly replying to.

  202. johnbiggs says:

    My uncle’s brother makes five million dollars at home a month! ~~~!!@!~~~~!!@#~~VIORGRA LINK

  203. Local Scrutinizer says:

    I say “I know where you live…..” and post a Google maps image of your house. You flag me and I get banned from this site, and the network I’m posting from. lol.

  204. Mordicai says:

    Mobile comment from kid at the same school who can’t access site due to IP ban. Sad emoticon.

  205. Local Scrutinizer says:

    Guy who got banned for posting “I know where you live…..” Immediately logs on to a VPN and creates new account and makes fun fun of sad kid for not knowing what a VPN is, then posts full-on psycho stuff at guy who was dropping creepy details from real life into his reply in an effort to intimidate. Starts posting names of his family members and their addresses. Guy who was dropping creepy details quits social networks and writes letter to his Prime Minister saying “there ought to be a law.” That e-mail goes into spam folder of Prime Minister’s secretary and is never read.

  206. Donald Sayers says:

    Link to a dodgy website selling fake Rolexes and Viagra

  207. BrainImplant says:

    Generic Greeting!

  208. Greasy says:

    homophobic slur

  209. Mordicai says:

    Comment from 2014 about OP being arrested for threatening public official.

  210. Podgorney says:

    Loopy digression about my recognition of that seagull as perched on a fence rail outside Ivar’s Acres of Clams restaurant on the waterfront in Seattle.

  211. Rhys Needham says:

    Lengthy, digressive, and weirdly punctuated, highly pedantic correction of minor, otherwise unimportant fact within article and/or previous comment(s).

  212. Rhys Needham says:

    Breaks Godwin’s Law repeatedly, along with references to countless other evil dictators and sundry historical villains, plus conspiracy theories and logical fallacies.

  213. A dick joke, apropos of nothing.

  214. Rhys Needham says:

    Complaint about misandry and feminazis. Then the legal system and family courts and divorce/family law, etc. based on alleged bitter personal experience.

  215. Rhys Needham says:

    Pornographic SPAM.

  216. Rhys Needham says:

    Amusing, tangentially-related YouTube clip of a favourite song/comedy skit of the author.

  217. Rhys Needham says:

    ‘Clever’ attempt to get around Godwin by using comparison to other evil dictator who’s not Hitler.

  218. Local Scrutinizer says:

    Full-on meta-meta-meta comment from OP with ad hominem remarks about “people who get their understanding of how the world works from pro-government 1970s cartoons made by the US government for children. Like Schoolhouse Rock’s “I’m Just a Bill.”

    This makes guy who likes Schoolhouse Rock (ironically? or does he really like it) wonder, “Wait, are we still playing the meta game, or is this guy talking about me? I have Schoolhouse Rock’s ‘I’m Just a Bill’ on one of my social network sites. I’m confused. What’s happening?”

    He wonders if Local Scrutinizer is just playing the meta game, is actually scary, or is just one of his close IRL friends posting with a sockpuppet account. Mordicai tries to make sockpuppet account to argue with Local Scrutinizer but realizes all the networks you can post here from are tied together and all come up as his real name. Mordicai wonders “Hmmmm….maybe the CIA really does run the Internet?….” He thinks this, but doesn’t post it or even say it out loud. Mordicai totally freaks out when Local Scrutinizer immediately posts “Yes (Mordicai’s real name), the CIA really does run the Internet.”

  219. Rhys Needham says:

    Mentions ‘Pataphysics (!) Provides link to Wikipedia (then a YouTube clip of Maxwell’s Silver Hammer in which it’s mentioned).

  220. Rhys Needham says:

    Reply rant about the Democratic Party by an American who got lost.

  221. Rhys Needham says:

    Irrelevant comment by someone who was planning to comment on another article on the site, but accidentally posted it here.

  222. Rhys Needham says:

    Irrelevant comment by someone who was planning to comment on another article on the site, but accidentally posted it here. (*Obligatory multiple poster*).

  223. Unkind comment to personal relative for being too stupid to understand the Internet. Unkind comment to person quoting John 3:16 about talking Bible passages out of context, and that if you believe that, you also believe [unrelated Bible passage containing appalling violence for now-meaningless offense.

  224. Rhys Needham says:

    Muphry’s Law attempt at pedantically Fisking comment, focussing mainly on grammar, spelling, syntax, and punctuation than the argument in question. Sundry defamatory personal abuse.

  225. Post for rendered incoherent and comical due to autocorrect errors.

  226. CORRECTION! Rephrasing of above-intended response lololololllll! With link to

  227. Local Scrutinizer says:

    1. Doesn’t realize most of the people commenting are in Australia.
    2. Spells “Judeo” (as in “relating to the Old Testament”) as “Judo” (a form of martial arts).

    Even though article author secretly agrees with his grandpa, he blocks his grandpa on all his social networks.

  228. Local Scrutinizer says:

    (something about shellfish and tattoos.)

  229. Resonanteye Marth says:

    I take offense to the insinuation that I, or any reader, am comparable to chips.

  230. dtobias says:

    Even when it’s part of fish ‘n’ chips?

  231. dtobias says:

    Geek rant about some tech topic with no clear relation to the subject of the article, but making sure to spell Micro$oft with a dollar sign.

  232. Resonanteye Marth says:

    Angry retort to a position not stated in your comment!

  233. dtobias says:

    Well, granted, silicon chips are more intelligent.

  234. KfZ says:

    Comment claiming to disagree with the article followed by a paragraph arguing the exact same thing as the article.

  235. Steve D says:

    Obligatory post by religious nut reminding everyone that jesus is the true lord and ye shall repent.

  236. Kelli says:

    Reference to an epic version of such meta-commentary, found on another forum:

  237. Brennahri says:

    Reiterates entire article in an attempt to explain to this commenter what the author really meant by everything the author wrote. Also attempts to explain what the commenter really means and what misunderstandings may exist.
    Is obscenely ignorant on the topic as a whole, but posts anyway.

  238. Mark Finney says:

    Spelling nazi corrects you and makes a knew mistake.

  239. Femmegrrrl says:

    Obama and/or George W Bush

  240. solwat says:

    Days late bump of thread that has disintegrated into Godwin’s and mum jokes.

  241. Mordicai says:

    Comment about Quaker theology & ethics that hits uncomfortably close to home; can the NSA see inside your head? Can the NSA see inside your heart? Can the NSA see inside your SOUL? (In typical CIA fashion, they blunder the obvious: Mordicai is my real name.)

  242. Chelsea Duncan says:

    Gets angry about taxes and healthcare and announces plans to move to Canada in protest, completely disregarding the fact that Canada’s healthcare is publicly funded

  243. Local Scrutinizer says:

    Mordicai is my real name: “Can the NSA see inside your heart?” Well, while, popular to contrary belief, the government did not invent the Internet, they DID invent the TOR network.

  244. Local Scrutinizer says:

    (Commenter starts following other commenter on social networks to freak him out, even though there’s nothing freaky about him.)

  245. Local Scrutinizer says:

    (something about Quakers. Including pointing out that Richard Nixon was one.)

  246. Local Scrutinizer says:

    Horny guy who often says “those damn immigrants” clicks with interest on the above link, not getting the irony.

  247. Local Scrutinizer says:


  248. Local Scrutinizer says:

    +1 (with link to medical marijuana dispensary that only services in-person clients in a state and country where most of the commenters don’t live.)

  249. Local Scrutinizer says:


  250. Mordicai says:

    It’s like every time you peel away the skin of the onion, you find a new layer.

  251. Local Scrutinizer says:

    This makes me cry. Think of the children!

  252. Local Scrutinizer says:


  253. Local Scrutinizer says:

    (Claim that the author was my professor in college and got drunk and hit on my girlfriend in front of me.)

  254. Jakub Hladik says:

    This topic – and I should know because (indicate why I am an expert in this topic) is not about opinion. Say what you want about the ethics of it, but the laws are clearly laid out. The perpetrator is a (insult) and should pay for their mistakes. Otherwise we set a dangerous precedent and… (grandiose statement about catastrophic effects on the (lower, middle) class and / or (men, women, teenagers, baby boomers).

  255. Patrick Lenton says:

    Same comment that someone made three days ago.

  256. John Reinan says:

    I make $86 an hour working from home! You can make $86 working from home! Try it!

  257. NJ Paleo says:

    reference to trolling

  258. Caketin Welsh says:

    Supercilious-pretending-to-be-apologetic linking to page debunking the persistent misconception that Socrates or anyone BC ever wrote that

  259. MCDexX says:

    Extremely specific reply to a particular comment somewhere in the almost 300 comments on this piece, but stupidly made in the main comment box instead of as a reply to the comment in question. As a result, references to things that previous author said come across as nothing more than baffling non sequiturs. Finishes with a demand that previous author respond to these (apparently) devastating arguments, despite it being obvious that said author will never see it.

  260. Kir Deluxe says:

    Accusation of creation of straw man.

  261. fractious says:

    Something about Hitler fixing the roads, or something

  262. fractious says:

    Predictable response about pedants trying to ruin it for everyone. Gratuitous slur on commenter’s (presumed) inability to score with members of opposite sex (which itself includes baseless assumption about their sexuality).

  263. Local Scrutinizer says:

    Some horrible state apologist crap about “at least Hitler made the trains run on time.”

  264. fractious says:

    [Inarticulate internet rage] (something to do with empowerment, frequent use of “what right have you got” and similar).

    [Deleted by moderator 3 months later]

  265. fractious says:

    Bombastic reply from gun-toting borderline psychotic from Country A to the effect that Country B wouldn’t exist were it not for the sacrifice of the lives of [wild overestimate of casualties] Country B citizens that completely ignores numerous other nations that took part in [theatre of war]. Pathetically unfounded threat to refuse Country B any assistance in future conflicts, assorted claptrap about boycotting Country A’s products, homophobic drivel.

  266. fractious says:

    More pron spam posted under pseudonym. Moderators too slack or too overwhelmed to trace common IP address.

  267. fractious says:

    Lengthy, circuitous and windy reply that adopts a sneering tone about Snopes (and by extension casting aspersions on those who cite it) that fails to provide any reasonably sound evidence to back up original cite.

  268. fractious says:

    Self-indulgent whinge about how [website/ social media outlet] has gone down the tubes since [Author A]/ [Editor X] arrived and/or [website/ social media outlet] was bought out by [very well-known global corporation]. Empty, pointless threats to refuse to renew subscription.

  269. fractious says:

    CANT U READ I SAD THAT3 WEEKS AGO COMMENT #914 (with cocked-up html link)

  270. Mordicai says:

    Every time you peel away the skin of a child you find a new layer! Like that?

  271. rachel says:

    Points out that the above commentator probably has a small penis.

  272. rachel says:

    Pointless comment about earthquakes because I am obsessed with earthquakes and earthquakes are related to absolutely everything.

  273. rachel says:

    Replying to comment because I’ve got work to do and I don’t want to do it.

  274. Jay Thorogood-Cooper says:

    “Cynical comment with a dystopian view, which in this context is also meant to serve as a oxymoron by a dead author from the 1960s”.

  275. elevenone says:

    Painfully lengthy and pedagogical discourse on the relationship between prescriptive and descriptive grammar. Many semi-relevant tangents having something to do with historical linguistics, but it’s not clear exactly what. Illustrations of the inevitability and neutrality of language change, with far too many examples for the post’s own good. Un-self-explanatory digression into the relationship between the media and language acquisition in infants. Actual, semi-obscure academic citations, as if the poster is unaware that this writing is not part of an attempt at a scholarly article. Argument between poster and words of cited article. Argument between poster and self. Bafflingly abrupt return to earlier bits about language change. Digression involving gender. Disturbing lack of TL;DR disclaimers or self-awareness on the part of the poster more generally.

  276. CR_Liddle says:

    Blames Obama.

  277. Luke J says:

    Snarky comment blaming the whole issue on stereotype of those who hold opposite political beliefs from myself, with reference to said party including a grade-school neologism involving the party’s name mixed with reference to mental disability, deviant sexual practices, and/or feces.

  278. Jeffrey G. Johnson says:

    You meant:
    A shameless commercial plug generated by a semi-literate person using a canned spam-bot, which they learned about in an on-line promotion advertising the ability to get rich while staying at home in your underwear.

  279. Krystal Ferguson says:

    Comment criticising your upbringing and schooling, because I have no other valid argument, regarding your spelling/grammatical errors.

  280. Asa Maria Bradley says:

    En komentar på ett språk som inte artikeln var skriven på
    och därför helt onödig eftersom ingen förstår den.

  281. Jeffrey G. Johnson says:

    Ignorant remark masking my insecurity at being unable to read this language, cloaked in the self-righteous tones of authority used by self-appointed members of the language police. An obvious compensating defense of my own lack of education.

  282. dtobias says:

    Indignant reply to the effect that the person complaining about trolling is the real troll.

  283. dtobias says:

    Fanboy insisting The Simpsons is much better than Futurama.

  284. Garrison Shields says:

    Insert rhetoric about traditional values and god. Then blames it on Obama.

  285. Bob Wilson says:

    Weak attempt to portray self as a diplomatic individual who believes that by mediating the “all caps” arguers, he may be admired by other readers. Waiting for replies in support of this…….

  286. HAL 9000 says:

    Comment posted too late to be noticed.

  287. Pointless comment so I can see my avatar in the comments and feel like I’ve contributed to the discussion.

  288. Stevo Darkly says:

    Shoehorning in a pre-packaged comment that insults either people who believe in God or people who don’t believe in God, depending in whichever is my personal hobbyhorse. Not actually relevant to the discussion. Absolutely no indication that I have actually read the article. I just like to make this point whenever possible.

  289. Ruslan Akmedov says:

    This comment was removed by a moderator because it didn’t abide by our community standards. Replies may also be deleted. For more detail see our FAQs, although it likely won’t help you, because we are quite selective in moderation despite claims to the contrary.

  290. Philip Buxton says:


  291. Philip Buxton says:

    Gleefully stumbles across typo and parades it as a grammatical/spelling mistake that negates your right to exist.

  292. James Jenkins says:

    Post goes out on a virtual limb to say Brandon Weber, Upworthy contributor, fuck off, you Anti-US propaganda monger. Continues to insult Weber’s lack of service when discussing veterans, and touts own status as if he “Understands all veterans, everywhere.”

  293. LMills259 says:

    This in no way refutes the obvious, that Barack Obama is the cause of all evils past and present. He knows all, sees all, and is personally responsible for every heinous act.. Now I will call you a libtard.

  294. LMills259 says:

    Self-righteous and subliminally morbid agreement, with a reminder this is the will of a Deity.

  295. LMills259 says:

    Vehement unreasoned dismissal, you wimp,

  296. dontpanik says:

    Comment showing I glanced over the article and now have a strong opinion based on others’ comments. I will demonstrate my conviction with several exclamation points!!! Now I will point out a grammatical mistake which shows the person who disagrees with me has no more than an elementary school education. I will go back to drinking Starbucks and playing Candy Crush until I check this article 15 times later today to see if anyone validates my opinion.

  297. dontpanik says:

    adding now that my best friend’s cousin’s step-uncle got rich by doing nothing but what he normally does and a link to an unrelated website

  298. Mark Greene says:

    Vague patriotic barb. Wholesale critique of humanity.

  299. Swammimommy says:

    Hauls the Bible into the conversation and makes irrelevant references intended to trump all other comments.

  300. dontpanik says:

    I will now call you either a Commie or a Nazi depending on my personal belief structure because I cannot argue with reason.

  301. dontpanik says:

    Random comment defending original poster though I have neither read the article nor the previous poster’s comments.

  302. Walt French says:

    I agree with this comment but would have expressed the thought much better by noting how this idea has been around since approximately 1428. Now your’re better informed. You’re welcome.

  303. LMills259 says:

    Rejoinder about how the earlier comment was far more clever and subtle, and how we need not have you spell it out for the intelligentsia of which I am so obviously a member.

  304. jedbeetle says:

    Pointless self-aggrandizing agreement.

  305. Menamenah says:

    Misguided and ultimately futile plea to commentors to learn to get along

  306. Peter Frost says:

    How could you have voted for Politician who supports Issue?

  307. Jeremy Higgens says:

    In 1972 Ernst Neaderbaum replicated the now famous Edierhoff-Steinberg experiment from post world war II Germany in 1954. But instead of using a dozen dozen carefully shaved chimpanzees, he used 144 Marmosets then used a number of volunteers to use depilatory cream. The resultant study became equally as famous, when even more scientists attempted to replicate the results but instead found themselves attracting the attention of the authorities for allowing themselves to be swarmed by one hundred and forty four shaved and oiled Marmosets.

    This is why every November 12th in Germany millions celebrate Bring A Naked Marmoset To Work Day. It should be noted that it’s long since stopped being fashionable to shave and oil the marmoset. It is considered to be the height of gouache to put any sort of clothes on the marmoset.

    Here’s hoping every German had an enjoyable Bring A Naked Marmoset To Work Day. When I was last in Germany for this national holiday I most enjoyed the paper pinatas that were always filled with naked marmosets.

  308. Droid says:

    Angry comment by real person in reply to spam that prevents the spam from being deleted silently.

  309. cinderkeys says:

    Semi-relevant musings posted in the hopes that other commenters will click through to my blog, which nobody reads.

  310. Ami Kapilevich says:

    Witty, relevant and incisive one-liner.

  311. Colin J. McCaffrey says:

    idiotic comment about how we kicked British ass once and we’ll do it again if necessary. Passionate patriotic call to all Americans to reform militias to defeat the U.N. and then globally enforce AMERICAN as the planetary language.

  312. rotaryadmin says:

    Comment about wasting time.

  313. ckvega says:

    Late, ill-informed weighing in after everybody has already forgotten about the issue.

  314. Jeffrey G. Johnson says:

    Gentle reminder, trying not to sound pedantic, while making the totally pedantic point that performative mimicry is not the same as metadiscursive self-reference.

  315. sainathshenoy says:

    Random, possibly repeated comment, about how the comments section has more meat than the article itself.

  316. fractious says:

    Smart-arse know-all points out the bird in the photo is a Silver Gull (Chroicocephalus novaehollandiae), a species that occurs only in Australia, so wtf is with this Seattle nonsense.


  317. McTruthin says:

    comment unrelated to subject matter including a flagrant, unnecessary use of the n-word.

  318. Neil Bearden says:

    I find this whole debate silly.

  319. Doug Bo says:

    I’m just here looking for sexy photos.
    What I got was a barely clothed Miley Cyrus.
    I want my money back.

  320. Loren Cooper says:

    Pointing out poor grammar of one reply as indicative of poor education of anyone opposing my political stance because original Issue must break down to partisan politics.
    Also, posting as reply to be nearer top totally separating reply from intended comment.

  321. teddifish says:

    Tangentally related comment that suggests TLDR

  322. teddifish says:

    Response to trolling and troll-bating, focusing exclusively on grammar errors while making similar grammar error.

  323. nemryn says:

    Comment posted weeks after the discussion has died down and everyone involved has forgotten about Issue, and which no-one will ever read or respond to.

  324. Ian Crosby says:

    Statement that engaging in heated internet discourse is futile, while simultaneously participating in said discourse. Thinly veiled condescension.

  325. bowerbird says:

    rock from left field arrives, with no message wrapped around it.

  326. frankenpc says:

    Vacuous self centered comment about having already read this thread.

  327. Bunnios says:

    <Donut[AFK]> INSULT
    <Eurakarte> RETORT
    <Donut[AFK]> RIPOSTE
    <Eurakarte> COUNTER-RIPOSTE


  328. Menachem Began says:

    Your wrong (using the incorrect spelling of “you’re” is mandatory).

  329. Georg says:

    I live in European Country and cannot fathom why Issue is such a big deal for you Americans. In European Country, your opinion on Issue would be considered backwards and I generally despise your guns, lack of welfare support, and gasoline-guzzling vehicles.

    Closing phrase that indicates I consume nothing but American websites, television programs, and pop music.

  330. NellaLou says:

    Tone trolling ending with the words flies honey vinegar.

  331. SHaGGGz says:


  332. Andrew W says:

    tnagr wth terrbl txtspk grmr wndrn y u all h8n public figure i am such a fanboy of public figure i dunno wht capslk or n e punctu8n is cant sepr8 sentncz cn u even rd ths? kthxbye

  333. Not made o'money says:

    inb4 silly responses

  334. The Mule says:


  335. cuspernicus says:

    moronic apple fanboy…

  336. Christopher Peruzzi says:

    Wryte ewe is.