What happened to all of the doom and gloom economic threads?

[unregistered]

 

[busybody..]

NIGGER REID and NIGGER SHITTER SAVAGE, sleeping in same bed

WannaBe NIGGER, SHITTER SAVAGE doesnt care and will keep AXIN

SHOW ME THE REGS


George Will: Carl’s Jr. is Choking on Regulation


Bob Beauprez




A couple of weeks back on these pages we wrote of our outrage over the following jaw-dropping statement made by Harry Reid, the Leader of the Democrats, on the floor of the U.S. Senate:

"… my Republican friends have yet to produce a single shred of evidence that the regulations they hate so much do the broad economic harms they claim. That's because there aren't any."

Reid is using his power as the Majority Leader of the Senate to deny nearly two dozen regulation relief bills already passed by the House to come to the floor of the Senate for a vote at a time when 26 million Americans are unemployed, under employed, or have given up even trying to find a job.

George Will, the nationally syndicated columnist for the Washington Post, put an exclamation point on the issue of excessive government regulation with a column about the plight of CKE Restaurants, the parent company of Carl’s Jr. and Hardee’s. Founded in 1941 by a 24 year old truck driver named Carl Karcher with $326 and a hot dog cart, CKE now operates 3200 restaurants employing 70,000 people. Karcher’s story is yet another example of the American Dream becoming reality.

Karcher passed away in 2008, but his legacy lives on with CEO Andy Puzder now at the helm. Puzder says that the company is surviving these difficult times, but “it would thrive, but for government’s comprehensive campaign again job creation,” as George Will wrote.

This is a real life tragic story of how state and federal government regulation is killing jobs and the economy they all say they are pledged to “stimulate.” As you read Will’s entire column (link here) think, too, about how many other Carl Karcher’s American Dreams will never become a reality because the convoluted morass of government thou-shalt-not regulations that send a loud-and-clear message to today’s entrepreneurs to “don’t even think about it.”








Bob Beauprez
Bob Beauprez is a former Member of Congress and is currently the editor-in-chief of A Line of Sight, an online policy resource. Prior to serving in Congress, Mr. Beauprez was a dairy farmer and community banker. He and his wife Claudia reside in Lafayette, Colorado. You may contact him at: http://bobbeauprez.com/contact/

 

[busybody..]

Not that NIGGER SHITTER SAVAGE cares

NIGGER SHITTER SAVAGE

says

WILL?

Who HE? A WHITE GUY THAT HATES NIGGER HO!

We dont read WILL

Choking on Obamacare





By George F. Will, Published: December 2




LOS ANGELES

In 1941, Carl Karcher was a 24-year-old truck driver for a bakery. Impressed by the large numbers of buns he was delivering, he scrounged up $326 to buy a hot dog cart across from a Goodyear plant. And the war came.




.

So did millions of defense industry workers and their cars. And, soon, Southern California’s contribution to American cuisine — fast food. Including, eventually, hundreds of Carl’s Jr. restaurants. Karcher died in 2008, but his legacy, CKE Restaurants, survives. It would thrive, says CEO Andy Puzder, but for government’s comprehensive campaign against job creation.

CKE, with more than 3,200 restaurants (Carl’s Jr. and Hardee’s), has created 70,000 jobs, 21,000 directly and 49,000 with franchisees. The growth of those numbers will be inhibited by — among many government measures — Obama*care.

When CKE’s health-care advisers, citing Obamacare’s complexities, opacities and uncertainties, said that it would add between $7.3 million and $35.1 million to the company’s $12 million health-care costs in 2010, Puzder said: I need a number I can plan with. They guessed $18 million — twice what CKE spent last year building new restaurants. Obamacare must mean fewer restaurants.

And therefore fewer jobs. Each restaurant creates, on average, 25 jobs — and as much as 3.5 times that number of jobs in the community. (CKE spends about $1 billion a year on food and paper products, $175 million on advertising, $33 million on maintenance, etc.)

Puzder laughs about the liberal theory that businesses are not investing because they want to “punish Obama.” Rising health-care costs are, he says, just one uncertainty inhibiting expansion. Others are government policies raising fuel costs, which infect everything from air conditioning to the cost (including deliveries) of supplies, and the threat that the National Labor Relations Board will use regulations to impose something like “card check” in place of secret-ballot unionization elections.

CKE has about 720 California restaurants, in which 84 percent of the managers are minorities and 67 percent are women. CKE has, however, all but stopped building restaurants in this state because approvals and permits for establishing them can take up to two years, compared to as little as six weeks in Texas, and the cost to build one is $100,000 more than in Texas, where CKE is planning to open 300 new restaurants this decade.

CKE restaurants have 95 percent employee turnover in a year — not bad in this industry — and the health-care benefits under CKE’s current “mini-med” plans are capped in a way that makes them illegal under Obamacare. So CKE will have to convert many full-time employees to part-timers to limit the growth of its burdens under Obamacare.

In an economic climate of increasing uncertainties, Puzder says, one certainty is that many businesses now marginally profitable will disappear when Obamacare causes that margin to disappear. A second certainty is that “employers everywhere will be looking to reduce labor content in their business models as Obamacare makes employees unambiguously more expensive.”

According to the U.S. Small Business Administration, by 2008 the cost of federal regulations had reached $1.75 trillion. That was 14 percent of national income unavailable for job-creating investments. And that was more than 11,000 regulations ago.

Seventy years ago, the local health department complained that Karcher’s hot dog cart had no restroom facilities. He got help from a nearby gas station. A state agency made him pay $15 for workers’ compensation insurance. Another agency said that he owed more than the $326 cost of the cart in back sales taxes. For $100, a lawyer successfully argued that Karcher did not because his customers ate their hot dogs off the premises.

Time was, American businesses could surmount such regulatory officiousness. But government’s metabolic urge to boss people around has grown exponentially and today CKE’s California restaurants are governed by 57 categories of regulations. One compels employees and even managers to take breaks during the busiest hours, lest one of California’s 200,000 lawyers comes trolling for business at the expense of business.

Barack Obama has written that during his very brief sojourn in the private sector he felt like “a spy behind enemy lines.” Puzder knows what it feels like when gargantuan government is composed of multitudes of regulators who regard business as the enemy. And 22.9 million Americans who are unemployed, underemployed or too discouraged to look for employment know what it feels like to be collateral damage in the regulatory state’s war on business.

georgewill@washpost.com

 

[busybody..]

Any second

NIGGERSHITTERSAVAGE will AXE again

SHOW ME THE REGS AND HOW THEY INHIBIT GROWTH.....


NIGGERSHITTERSAVAGE doesnt really care

 

[4est_4est_Gump]

Our economic problems rightfully dominate the news. However, they are merely symptoms of a bigger, underlying problem: government.

For many, the previous paragraph is heresy. They "know" that government is necessary and good. They "know" that government solves problems and brings order to the chaos that would prevail in its absence. "They" are wrong!

Government has become little more than a carefully crafted myth based on propaganda disseminated by government itself. It has devolved into a scheme of plunder whereby the elites plunder the masses.

It did not start that way, at least not so egregiously. Government transmogrified into a vicious predator, preying on the wealth of the productive to enrich the political class and its cronies. It is no longer a force for good, but for evil. It has turned into the biggest criminal enterprise known to man.

This quote from Albert J. Nock is eight decades old, but appropriately describes what passes for government in Washington, D.C. today:

Taking the State wherever found, striking into its history at any point, one sees no way to differentiate the activities of its founders, administrators and beneficiaries from those of a professional-criminal class.

Americans have always viewed government skeptically. The vast majority of people still believe government is necessary. They also believe government is a potential, if not actual, evil because of its monopoly on power. Our Founding Fathers were explicit regarding this potential. George Washington described government as follows:

Government is not reason; it is not eloquent; it is force. Like fire, it is a dangerous servant and a fearful master.

A carefully crafted Constitution was drawn up to contain government and its power. Over time, it was effectively demolished. With it went most limitations on government.

The myth of government rests on two key assumptions -- government is necessary and beneficial. Both are supported via the State's propaganda machine. Few citizens recognize government as a predator enriching the elite. More realize that something is terribly wrong and that government has become too big and intrusive.

Government is deemed necessary because, it is claimed, there are things that the private sector would not or could not do, at least not efficiently. This assumption contains both a value judgment and an efficiency judgment.

The value judgment implies that individuals or firms would be unwilling to provide important services justifying government coercion to improve society. But this belief raises the question of whether the value judgments chosen are correct.

A small cadre of men imposing its will on the rest of society is very dangerous. Even if one accepts a particular role for government, it does not mean that the form which is implemented will be acceptable.

The efficiency aspect of government can be meaningfully explored. How well government has measured up on the efficiency criterion is discussed in the next section.

There are two levels on which to explore government efficiency:

The Macro Level pertains to the performance of government with respect to the economy.

Ludwig von Mises and Friedrich Hayek, leading figures in Austrian economics, maintained that an economy is too complex to be managed centrally. Infinite decisions based on infinite pieces of knowledge cannot be managed by a central decision-maker. From their standpoint, economies afford greater efficiency and satisfaction with limited government and a laissez-faire approach.

John Maynard Keynes and his disciples saw economies as inherently unstable. They believed that government management of an economy is necessary to ensure full employment and high output. For eighty-plus years, the Keynesian interventionist views have prevailed and enabled government to continue to grow and become increasingly intrusive.

Studies generally show an inverse relationship between large government and economic growth and well-being. These can hardly be termed decisive. Extreme cases of centralized economic management like Communist Russia, Communist China, Nazi Germany, Cuba, and North Korea are clear-cut. All were economic failures which produced great human tragedy.

East Berlin and West Berlin, North Korea and South Korea, and Taiwan and Communist China were laboratory-like experiments. In every instance, free-market economies dramatically outperformed government-directed economies.

The Social Welfare State has been the philosophy and excuse for bigger government. The European States, its leading proponent, are in process of failing. They will shortly be unable to meet their social promises and sovereign obligations. This collapse appears imminent and will likely signal the retreat of this philosophy, at least for a while.

Monty Pelerin

Read more: http://www.americanthinker.com/2011/12/government_gone_wild.html#ixzz1fkwASGTm

 

[JAMESBJOHNSON]

Whats really scary is how gubmint is relentlessly obtrusive with its empire building. In Fubar County its illegal to raise poultry (one or a million), even in rural areas. The 4H is pissing and snorting about the law, and the county commission is considering changing the law to allow restricted possession of poultry (hens only) with bans for slaughter and egg/meat consumption.

My garden is about 25'x25' in area, and its a rare week when I get no visitors from the county. I suspect theyre looking for code violations.

 

[4est_4est_Gump]

Whats really scary is how gubmint is relentlessly obtrusive with its empire building. In Fubar County its illegal to raise poultry (one or a million), even in rural areas. The 4H is pissing and snorting about the law, and the county commission is considering changing the law to allow restricted possession of poultry (hens only) with bans for slaughter and egg/meat consumption.

"Doin' right's got no end!"
Cap'n Redlegs Terrill

 

[unregistered]

 

[4est_4est_Gump]

Plenty of them Capitalists down in Texas...




:nods:

 

[4est_4est_Gump]

And China was going to save the global economy? Guess again
Sol W. Sanders

Creeping up on the outer edges of Wall Street soothsayers’ economic crystal ball, until now dominated by American and Euro crises, is growing concern about China.

The inane idea China [and India, which is also in trouble] would somehow rescue the world economy is now, finally, dismissed by the pundits — without apologies. How a largely export-led, mercantilist economy was to save the world with its principle markets in the U.S. and the EU winnowing down was never explained. Continued wishful references to Chinese leadership’s equally improbable promises to boost domestic consumption are also falling away.

China's central bank in Beijing cut the reserve requirement ratio for its banks on Nov. 30 for the first time in nearly three years to ease credit strains and shore up activity in the world's second-largest economy.

There is, in fact, a growing consensus the Chinese economy is spiraling down. One respected Hong Kong economist, Ms. Wang Tao of UBS, is predicting a gross domestic growth [GDP] rate toward 7 percent before year’s end. That’s below the red line 8 percent long considered by the double-domes as the minimum to satisfy jobs for China’s growing population.

Soon we can hope to hear an end to those straight-line projections — so wrong two decades ago in Japan predictions — which take China’s current world No. 2 GDP to soaring heights. Indeed, China is the classic example of inadequacies of GDP as an economic barometer. Even assuming official figures are reliable — which is a far stretch — China’s GDP has inflated with vast over expansion of infrastructure and massive corruption indicating enormous activity but not necessarily a basis for continued stability and growth. [Remember Euroland’s GDP/consumption figures before the fall!] Nor do we have more than a notional figure for huge military outlays.

Granted, some of us who have been predicting a China crash for years, arguing its miraculous transformation was jerrybuilt. But we have always said what would trip the fall, when, and how the Chinese would cope with it, is unpredictable — as so many things in life. Some full-time observers are now turning to the banking structure as chief concern. Whether you look at inadequacies of Communist Party decision makers in their see-saw battle to maintain maximum growth but head off any hint of inflation, a traditional Chinese destroyer of dynasties, the outlook is grim.

Larry Lang, a Hong Kong TV personality and Chinese University professor of finance, recently labeled provincial finances as “China’s many Greeces”. Beijing’s writ — as an old proverb goes — ends no longer at the village gate but increasingly at the provincial capital where regional authorities defy the center, desperate to meet growing resources demands.

Local politicos have wheedled, persuaded, bribed and threatened local government banks into credit far beyond their capacity to repay. Add that to the huge stock of non-performing loans banks give their Party buddies in the huge inefficient government companies and you have what could be the mother of all financial fiascos.
Just as politics does not end at the banks’ doors, the Communist Party is moving into a generational leadership succession year. In theory, the new president and prime minister have been anointed. But there is a lot of shin-kicking with the usual Communist turn to so-called ideological arguments masking personality, regional and purely economic interests.

A kind of neo-Maoism has surfaced. And it could take on new life as economic problems deepen because there has always been a strong Party constituency for preserving Soviet controls, planning and government ownership. Never mind that the fabled Chinese entrepreneurial spirit has taken hold with the partial liberalization of the past two decades. But much of this private sector with its disproportionately higher productivity was exports now hit hard with the downturn in the U.S. and Europe.

This has collapsed thousands of private businesses, particularly in South China’s clothing and gizmo assembly operations, leading to dramatic literal disappearances of owners and managers and growing unemployment. This, in turn, has fed already escalating unrest; Beijing has stopped reporting even the very suspect official figures.
It’s early on, of course, to predict this would develop into the kind of provincial disintegration bringing down virtually every China ruling dynasty through its long history. Still….

Meanwhile, China’s drop in demand for raw materials is already hitting world commodity markets — iron ore, for example, and soon to be coal and soya. That will have its effects on the overseas suppliers from Angola to Brazil to Australia [which has already seen a 10 percent drop in its high-flying dollar of a few weeks ago.]

http://www.worldnewstribune.com/201...going-to-save-the-global-economy-guess-again/

There is room for America to grow again if we can just overcome the altruistic Socialist desire for ever more government intervention and largess...

 

[busybody..]

There is room for America to grow again if we can just overcome the altruistic Socialist desire for ever more government intervention and largess...

You mean

HEAVE HO!?

 

[4est_4est_Gump]

You mean

HEAVE HO!?

Heave HO!
RINO GO!

 

[busybody..]

NIGGER SHITTER SAVAGE (who doesnt care) will bash this WHITE guy as UNPRODUCTIVE and AXE him to CLOSE up SHOP

YOU DONT HAVE TO LIVE LIKE A REFUGEE. Or maybe you do. Tax Practitioner Flees California for Nevada.“There comes a point where decisions are forced on you. With the growth of my business, I looked at possibly hiring another tax accountant in 2010. When I ran the numbers, I found that I would lose money by hiring a productive tax accountant. That’s because of all the regulations and costs that I would immediately incur if I had an employee. I’m not stupid: If I lose money by hiring someone, I’m not going to do it.”

 

[busybody..]

NIGGER SHITTER SAVAGE (he that doesnt care) seen NODDING with his POINTY WHITE HOOD ON



The Hill tells ‘Morning Joe’ GOP lawmakers ‘want out’ of Norquist tax pledge

By Geneva Sands-Sadowitz - 12/01/11 11:28 AM ET


The Hill Managing Editor Bob Cusack and reporter Russell Berman spoke Thursday with MSNBC’s “Morning Joe” about the growing number of GOP lawmakers who have disavowed Grover Norquist’s pledge against supporting tax increases.

“Some Republicans, they say, ‘I signed the pledge a decade ago, but I want out of it’ and Grover says, ‘No, when you sign the pledge it’s forever,’ so more and more Republicans are going after Grover,” Cusack said.

The Hill reported earlier this month that Norquist’s advocacy group, Americans for Tax Reform, lists 238 House signers of its Taxpayer Protection Pledge, but several House Republicans, and at least one Democrat, now say the anti-tax group is being deceptive and they want their names taken off the list.

Berman told MSNBC that some Republican House and Senate members said they no longer feel bound by the pledge.

“Part of the problem here is not so much the pledge, but how you define a tax increase,” Berman said. “And these members do not want one unelected official, in this case Grover Norquist, defining for them what is and what is not a tax increase.”


That is why I AXED NIGGER SHITTER SAVAGA (he that does nit care) to show me teh SIGNING STATEMENTS etc

Yet another RUSE and DECEPTION by


NIGGER SHITTER SAVAGE (he that does not care)

 

[busybody..]

NIGGER HO! and NIGGER SHITTER SAVAGE (he who does not care)

Two pees in a NIGGER pod

DUMMIES

BOTH


Welcome to Texas!
Campaigning in Kansas today, President Obama momentarily forgot which of the 57 states he was in:


But that was just a slip of the tongue. The really dumb thing he said is that the internet is causing unemployment:

Layoffs too often became permanent, not part of the business cycle. And these changes didn’t just affect blue collar workers. If you were a bank teller or a phone operator or a travel agent, you saw many in your profession replaced by ATMs and the internet.

This is one more reminder–as if we needed it–that President Obama has no understanding of the economy. He is, at heart, a Luddite. He doesn’t understand that when work is made more efficient, as by the internet, our economy becomes more productive and we are all better off. The internet has been responsible for creating countless jobs, as well as making many more jobs more efficient and therefore more profitable. Conversely, when inefficiency is created–as, for example, by wasteful “stimulus” spending or pointless regulations–wealth is destroyed, we all become poorer, and jobs are scarcer.

Obama’s reference to “phone operators” is revealing. Years ago, I read that early in the development of the telephone, some sage calculated that there could never be more than a certain number of telephones in use in the United States, because at that point, every young woman in America would be employed as a switchboard operator. In the event, that turned out not to be the constraint on telephone usage. But from Obama’s perspective, it would be a good thing to smash all that telephone equipment so that we could reduce unemployment among women to zero by putting them to work as switchboard operators. I truly believe that Obama has no understanding of why that would be a bad idea.

 

[busybody..]

Here is a BLACK MAN that tells NIGGER HO! and NIGGER SHITTER SAVAGE (he who does not care)

Something about REGULATIONS

Regulations= Have NUFFIN to do wiff NUFFIN, says NIGGER SHITTER SAVAGE (he who does not care)


Too Much Regulation is Killing Job Creation, Says…Obama Donor and Friend


Clarence Otis is CEO of Darden Restaurants,http://pjmedia.com/tatler/files/2011/12/clarence_otis2-85x85.jpg parent of Red Lobster, the Olive Garden and Longhorn Steakhouse. He’s a member of the Federal Reserve Bank in Atlanta, a donor to Democrats and a friend of the Obamas. So this editorial might leave a mark.


Policymakers working in silos at every level are pushing through regulations that on their face seem to address admirable goals — that are each directed at outcomes that seem desirable.

The cumulative effect of these regulations, however, is significant damage to the hard-working Americans who are the intended beneficiaries.

The employer mandate contained in the new health care reform law, for example, forces us to change the way we have offered health care coverage to our full- and part-time workers and, together with all the other looming regulations, causes us to rethink the way we schedule the hourly work force that is at the heart of how we deliver our product to customers.

Some suggest we accommodate the costs of new regulations in one of two ways: Accept lower profits, or charge customers more. Neither is a realistic alternative for many businesses, and certainly not for those in our industry. Like most in retail, low profit margins are a fact of life for us for good reason — low margins are consistent with charging prices our customers can afford.

The difficult reality is that neither our shareholders nor our customers — who are of course, the very working people policymakers champion — can afford the cost of the unbridled increase in regulation we’re experiencing.

There’s more.


Policymakers and pundits bemoan the economic news of the day and chastise the business community for not “investing” or creating jobs to help lead us out of the recession. But through the lens of a business owner, a regulatory “perfect storm” is forming that causes even the most well-intentioned business leaders to pause.

Some industries — including the restaurant industry — continue to grow and add jobs, but what we see on the horizon puts that at risk. In the year ahead, the company I lead expects to open roughly 80 new locations, each with about 100 jobs. The entire industry projects adding 1.3 million jobs over the next decade, according to the National Restaurant Association.

My plea to policymakers is simple: Before you impose another well-meaning mandate, consider the burden we already bear and engage us in conversation. Regulations are not inherently detrimental to growth. Responsible companies such as ours, that have been supportive of the president and elected officials of both parties across the country, won’t say “no” to everything and, indeed, what you might find is that we can help craft solutions that truly are better for everyone.

It’s worth taking a look at the timing of this editorial. Otis met with Obama face-to-face back in July. The meeting reportedly concerned job creation. It may be that Otis delivered a similar message in this editorial, to the president at that meeting. But did the president listen? In September, Michelle Obama “endorsed” menu items at Red Lobster and Olive Garden, both Darden restaurants. The Obamas may have intended that endorsement to signal friendliness, but to a business leader such a smile comes with sharp teeth: Behind the endorsement remains a push to keep on increasing the regulating. And Mr. Otis is now speaking out.

Tonight might be a good night for surf ‘n turf

 

[busybody..]

That man aint no BLACK man, thats a FAILED WHITE PERSON who couldnt make it

says

NIGGER SHITTER SAVAGE (he who does not care)

 

[busybody..]

NIGGER SHITTER SAVAGE (he who does not care)

Says

"THIS CUNT IS A FAILURE.................SEND HER BACK TO THE KITCHEN..........."


Small Business to Regulators: Keep it Simple, Give Us a Break


American businesses will face more than 4,200 new regulations in the coming year. The costs of complying with this daunting regulatory regime show up in the prices consumers pay, and in lost jobs. Ty Baker-Baumann owns Rebsco, Inc. in Greenville, OH. In this exclusive video, produced by the National Federation of Independent Business, she details the impact that burdensome regulations have on her business.


She writes:


My message for lawmakers in Washington is straightforward: keep it simple. In recent years, small business owners have shouldered the ever-increasing burden of complying with federal regulations. In the past five years, the number of proposed major regulations has increased by more than 60 percent. In 2010 alone, the number of regulations increased by 18 percent. And today, there are literally thousands of new rules just waiting to be handed out by Washington.

As a small business owner, I know firsthand the challenge of keeping up with all that the government asks. I employ between 20 and 30 workers depending on the season. Constantly, they have to be trained and certified on new procedures and equipment just to keep up with new, and often inconsistent, requirements imposed by government agencies like the Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA).

Don’t get me wrong, my workers’ safety and wellbeing is my top priority. That’s why I have in place workplace safety precautions and make my employees take training courses and obtain certifications beyond what is required. But trying to keep up with all the changes, many of which are later relaxed, is costly and time consuming. Often, I’ve had to delay or forego projects because the price of compliance outweighs the profitability of the project. In those cases, I’m not employing people I otherwise would.

What’s needed is a set of commonsense rules that are easy to follow and that cut out redundancy. Small business owners already have plenty on their plate. Regulators in Washington should focus on providing assistance to small businesses and help us comply with rules rather than constantly making changes and assessing penalties when we’re not able to keep up. Give us a break. It’s not complicated – keep it simple!

Having co-founded a small business myself, I can related to Baker-Baumann’s struggles. It takes tremendous drive, energy and determination to succeed, and there are no guarantees that you will. It also takes courage to step out and take on the regulatory state in public, as she has.

The Tatler will run more stories like Ty Baker-Baumann’s in the coming weeks.

 

[busybody..]

NIGGER SHITTER SAVAGE (he who does not care)


Says


"Show me the regulations and how they hurt,

I'll wait'


Keep waiting

NIGGER SHITTER SAVAGE (he who does not care)

Cause as BUSYBODY says


He who AXES

Doesnt really want an answer

 

[JohnnySavage]

<--- still waiting

 

[busybody..]

Ah, look who gets away from teh BOOB tube where he watchs the 1% kill teh FIRST AMERICANS

Why

Its

NIGGER SHITTER SAVAGE (he who does not care)

keep waiting

turb-ball

 

[JohnnySavage]

There has to be at least one Obama regulation/executive order that has cost jobs. Research shouldn't be this hard.

 

[busybody..]

There isnt

its all a LIE

 

[busybody..]

Congrats

You have now earned YOUR name

Like

POOP

and NIGGERPOONZANDI

and OH!FENDY!

You will now be known as

NIGGER SHITTER SAVAGE (he who does not care)

 

[JohnnySavage]

There isnt

its all a LIE

Super! Now we can go have a beer.


I don't drink, but I'll have an iced tea while you drink.