I like it. Have seen the "turd by clean end" phrase used a few times lately

We used to say about dudes from TerraBella that they'd run across a cow pie and have to fondle it and even taste it before they'd rule: "yep, its a turd alright!"

"Which is why you have to vote *OUT* the Republican Dumocrat incumbents instead.  Much more sanitary than trying to find the clean end of the party. a socialist sycophant"  ~Random

 Mattloched that for you.............

Two butterflies, Harry & Bob were flying over a meadow looking for something good to eat.  They spotted something in the meadow that looked promising. After much conversation about what the goodie might be, Bob said, “I’ll go check it out.”  After waiting a few minutes, Harry decided to check it out himself.  Just as he was getting closer to the meadow floor, Bob came zooming back up and yelled, “don’t touch it Harry, its horse sh**”

Hey Sage,

You calling me silly? I'm insulted!

I don't think there's a person out there who would argue that it's OK to scream "Retard" or "laugh at someone who is in a wheelchair".  Anyone who would do that would have serious problems of their own and should be pitied.  If you know of someone who does these things, perhaps they should be tested for turrets.  Although, I know people with turrets, and even they don't do that. 

There is a huge difference in what tonyh is talking about and "Inciteful Language".   Calling some one a "Retard" is inciteful.  Not knowing the proper adjective of the time (ie, mentally challanged) and refering to a person as  "mentally retarted" is not meant to harm.  It was at one time a perfectly accectable term. 

Footnote:  I'm not sure the term mentally challanged is up to date.  I could be using it here, thinking it is a perfectly acceptable adjective, and labeled a bigot.

I agree with all here who have displayed common sense with their words, including chico, dgrealish and RoyTullis. 

We used to call it being polite , way back when. You know,screaming retard and laughing at someone who is in a wheelchair....it has just become passe.

With all due respect, sagefever, you've mistaken have a basic consideration for those who are different from ourselves for political correctness which is, basically, a good thing (consideration for those who are different than ourselves) taken to an absurd extreme. 

What I find interesting is that the groups that are supposedly the victims, like the Muslims who are being wished a Merry Christmas, are not the ones doing the complaining.  Those complaining the most vehemently are atheists or agnostics who have a disdain for anything having to do with Christianity.  They are rushing to defend people, who are not even offended by the actions the atheists and agnostics are so vehemently protesting.

Robb~ Yes I am ,silly! lol

dgrelish~I wish you could have walked around town with me and my son~trust me "normies" or the normal,indeed do behave in just that way. I had just that screamed at my son,and other very lovely behaviors. Not a lot but my post was no more "over the top" than the excrement references. We will disagree,it is clear on most things. As I said in another post,to me saying Happy Holidays is just polite,not PC,because unless you are clearly identified as a particular faith I have no clue if what you believe ,if at all. I also think we all make a bigger deal of all of this than need be~it is just another way to try and divide us.

 As I said in another post,to me saying Happy Holidays is just polite,not PC,because unless you are clearly identified as a particular faith I have no clue if what you believe ,if at all. I also think we all make a bigger deal of all of this than need be~it is just another way to try and divide us.

I have yet to meet a person that has expressed the sense of being offended by me saying Merry Christmas to him or her.  If I know or have reason to believe that somebody is a practicing Muslim, or a practicing Jew, or whatever, I will say "Happy Holidays," but I'm not going to stop saying it altogether over a 1 percent chance that the person doesn't share the same sense of delight over Christmas.  Once again, it's a good thing (consideration) taken too far. 

You are free to say Happy Holidays, but some of us are cheerful because of Christmas and the special meaning it brings to us.  We should be free to celebrate it and say it, and, if you're of another faith, you should be free to proclaim the greeting you feel most cheerful about. 

Remember the recent NY Subway case where Jewish riders were assaulted by Christians for saying "Happy Hannukkah."  They were rescued by the timely intervention of a Muslim.

.

"Political correctness" is the derogatory label for behavior which recognizes that white male Protestants no longer have absolute power in this society.  They don't like the loss of control much.

Spam Code FEW GQ.  As you women know all too well.

I have yet to meet a person that has expressed the sense of being offended by me saying Merry Christmas to him or her.

Me neither Doc. That's why I believe the "War on Christmas" is a bunch of phoney baloney perpetuated by the supposed victims themselves. Every ding dang year, the slightest slight is blown way out of proportion. Makes good ratings, I guess... 

Here's the latest adventure into political-correctness:  http://www.news.com.au/dail...  Complete text below.

COUPLES who have more than two children should be charged a lifelong tax to offset their extra offspring's carbon dioxide emissions, a medical expert says.

A new report published in an Australian medical journal has called for parents to be charged $5,000 a head for every child after their second, and an annual tax of up to $800 every year thereafter.

And couples who get sterilised would be eligible for carbon credits under the controversial proposal.

Perth specialist Professor Barry Walters is heavily critical of the $4,000 baby bonus, saying that paying new parents extra for every baby fuels more children, more emissions and "greenhouse-unfriendly behaviour".

Instead, it should be replaced with a "baby levy" in the form of a carbon tax in line with the "polluter pays" principle, he wrote in the latest Medical Journal of Australia.

"Every family choosing to have more than a defined number of children should be charged a carbon tax that would fund the planting of enough trees to offset the carbon cost generated by a new human being," said Prof Walters, an obstetrician at King Edward Memorial Hospital in Perth.

Sustainable Population Australia suggested a maximum of two, he said.

By the same reasoning, contraceptives like diaphragms and condoms, as well as sterilisation procedures, should attract carbon credits, the specialist said.

"As doctors, I believe we need to think this way," he wrote in a letter to the journal.

"As Australians I believe we need to be less arrogant.

"As citizens of the world, I believe we deserve no more population concessions than those in India or China."

Professor Garry Egger, director of the NSW Centre for Health Promotion and Research, agreed with the call, saying former treasurer Peter Costello's request for three children per family - "one for mum, one for dad and one for the country" - was too single-minded.

"Population remains crucial to all environmental considerations," wrote Prof Eggers, a leading advocate of the personal carbon trading debate.

"The debate (around population control) needs to be reopened as part of a second ecological revolution."

Family groups have rejected the calls, saying larger families use less energy than smaller ones and therefore should not be penalised.

Awwwww,  just another attack on the poor (prolific) Hispanics!

sage, I've grown tired of explaining myself to you.  It seems it has become "PC" to explain myself or apologize each time I comment on something you've posted.  There was nothing offensive in what I said.  I didn't dispute the fact that you and your son suffered at the hands of others.  You chose to see what you wish.  That is your problem, not mine.  I'm currently reading a book called Games People Play by Eric Berne, MD.  I recommend it.