Don't like the snow? You can make a bookmark with the following text instead of a url: javascript:snowStorm.toggleSnow(). Clicking it will toggle the snow on and off.
Our new Indie Games subforum is now open for business in G&T. Go and check it out, you might land a code for a free game. If you're developing an indie game and want to post about it, follow these directions. If you don't, he'll break your legs! Hahaha! Seriously though.
Our rules have been updated and given their own forum. Go and look at them! They are nice, and there may be new ones that you didn't know about! Hooray for rules! Hooray for The System! Hooray for Conforming!

The American Presidency: Obama does not believe in prevent defense

1101113151661

Posts

  • PreacherPreacher Registered User regular
    edited October 2008
    Medopine wrote: »
    Did we already talk about the weird robocalls from the McCain campaign in here?

    Anyone have any insight into that bold move?

    I don't understand people who listen to a robot on the telephone.

    Well sometimes you have to, because if you don't they'll steal your medication and hurt you with their cold metal claws because robots are strong.

  • MedopineMedopine __BANNED USERS
    edited October 2008
    Well I'm referring to the ones being reported today as widespread and continuing the Ayers narrative

    http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2008/10/16/massive-rnc-robocall-may_n_135348.html

  • monikermoniker Registered User regular
    edited October 2008
    Medopine wrote: »
    Did we already talk about the weird robocalls from the McCain campaign in here?

    Anyone have any insight into that bold move?

    I don't understand people who listen to a robot on the telephone.

    They're just the Turing police.

    tea-1.jpg
  • monikermoniker Registered User regular
    edited October 2008
    Medopine wrote: »
    Did we already talk about the weird robocalls from the McCain campaign in here?

    Anyone have any insight into that bold move?

    The guess is they don't have enough volunteers to actually make the calls so they are throwing money at the problem.

    My guess is more that they don't want people who can go off script responding to follow up questions --like 'what the fuck is wrong with you people?' -- talking about how Obama is buddy buddy with terrorists.

    tea-1.jpg
  • JokermanJokerman Love is careless in its choosing. Registered User regular
    edited October 2008
    Zerokku wrote: »
    No-Quarter wrote: »
    Scalfin wrote: »
    Tostitos wrote: »
    the pole workers

    Your voting locations sound much more interesting than mine. :winky:

    On the topic of "the death of public financing", does anyone think this might change the kind of candidates we see? For example, would it make more sense for the Republicans to nominate more people like Palin, in an effort to get the base to crack open the wallets, or would a more middling position would still be better?

    Of course I post this right before the crazy so no one catches it as they lock in on that. :P

    Thinking about it more though, I think it'd probably have to be someone closer to the middle. As good as Palin was to the Republican fund raising, she's been extra kind to the Democrats. (to say nothing of her other effects)

    You're forgetting that the republicans are too stupid to connect the dots.

    Case in point, if Obama really is a terrorist than why hasn't the CIA and FBI done anything about it? Either 1. he's not and people are just fucking morons, 2. the FBI and CIA are more in the dark than several email chains, Fox pundits, racists and are hence incompetent, 3. Obama has infiltrated those organizations with secret liberal terrorist sympathizers in which case becoming President would likely be a step down in power.


    *sigh* I was just in a Gamestop where one of the register trolls was ranting about how Obama is a "literal terrorist" and "anti capitalist." :|

    There are a lot of dumbasses working at gamestops. Working at one, I would know -_-

    Not that it isn't obvious already.

    Gamestop makes me want to burn the stripmall to the ground...

    ImOaLfG.png?1
  • enlightenedbumenlightenedbum Registered User regular
    edited October 2008
    Medopine wrote: »
    Well I'm referring to the ones being reported today as widespread and continuing the Ayers narrative

    http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2008/10/16/massive-rnc-robocall-may_n_135348.html

    There are three others as well, as TPM has been reporting all day.
    * One that questions Obama's patriotism by saying he put "Hollywood above America" during the financial crisis.

    * One that says that Obama and Dems "aren't who you think they are" and claims they merely "say" they want to keep us safe.

    * One that attaches him to "domestic terrorist Bill Ayers," whose group "killed Americans."

    * And, now, the above, which dishonestly paints him as indifferent to the lives of babies.

    Lose: to suffer defeat, to misplace (Ex: "I hope I don't lose the match." "Did you lose your phone again?")
    Loose: about to slip, to release (Ex: "That knot is loose." "Loose arrows.")
  • Robos A Go GoRobos A Go Go Registered User regular
    edited October 2008
    Look, if you just respond to the voice on the phone with a paradox it'll leave you alone.

  • MedopineMedopine __BANNED USERS
    edited October 2008
    I mean, I thought Ayers was put to bed at the debate last night

    Are these robocalls just automatic or something and McCain can't stop them even though they're not going to help anymore?

    His campaign is really sad right now

  • enlightenedbumenlightenedbum Registered User regular
    edited October 2008
    Medopine wrote: »
    I mean, I thought Ayers was put to bed at the debate last night

    Are these robocalls just automatic or something and McCain can't stop them even though they're not going to help anymore?

    His campaign is really sad right now

    Are you saying it wasn't sad previously? Because if so, damn you have a lot of empathy.

    Lose: to suffer defeat, to misplace (Ex: "I hope I don't lose the match." "Did you lose your phone again?")
    Loose: about to slip, to release (Ex: "That knot is loose." "Loose arrows.")
  • Nimble CatNimble Cat Registered User regular
    edited October 2008
    Medopine wrote: »
    Did we already talk about the weird robocalls from the McCain campaign in here?

    Anyone have any insight into that bold move?

    I don't understand people who listen to a robot on the telephone.

    I kind of enjoy it. I feel like I'm in the future.

  • DaemonionDaemonion Registered User regular
    edited October 2008
    oldmanken wrote: »
    Seriously, this Joe the Plumber crap has to stop. CNN is making mention of him every 10 minutes or so... it's ridiculous.
    Spoiler:

    :winky:

    I hope someone gets this reference.

    Oh my god, is that Zeke the plumber? Camp Onawannawhatever?

    Strain 121 wrote: »
    Spoiler:

    LURK mod for SoC|Backloggery|XBL|XFire|Steam|Zune
  • PreacherPreacher Registered User regular
    edited October 2008
    Daemonion wrote: »
    oldmanken wrote: »
    Seriously, this Joe the Plumber crap has to stop. CNN is making mention of him every 10 minutes or so... it's ridiculous.
    Spoiler:

    :winky:

    I hope someone gets this reference.

    Oh my god, is that Zeke the plumber? Camp Onawannawhatever?

    Salute your Shorts was so awesome. Poor councilor Ugg.

  • CantidoCantido Registered User regular
    edited October 2008
    Preacher wrote: »
    Daemonion wrote: »
    oldmanken wrote: »
    Seriously, this Joe the Plumber crap has to stop. CNN is making mention of him every 10 minutes or so... it's ridiculous.
    Spoiler:

    :winky:

    I hope someone gets this reference.

    Oh my god, is that Zeke the plumber? Camp Onawannawhatever?

    Salute your Shorts was so awesome. Poor councilor Ugg.

    Bobby Budnick needed a good choking and a good Death Note'ing.

    steam_sig.png
  • monikermoniker Registered User regular
    edited October 2008
    Couscous wrote: »

    Wouldn't a trillion dollar investment plan be a boon to the economy? I'm pretty sure many of McCain's supporters are aware of Mr. Keynes and might be persuaded by his economics.

    tea-1.jpg
  • ElJeffeElJeffe Moderator, ClubPA mod
    edited October 2008
    I wanna make sure that I understand how Obama's tax plan will benefit the US. Given my near retarded lack of understand of economics, this is what I came up with.

    Let's consider the wealthy as those who control the means of production. America enjoys a capitalist economy. So, isn't the whole idea for them to produce, us to consume, so that they can produce more thus allowing us to consume more? We spend money, they make money. So, wouldn't it be logical to give tax breaks to the consumers as opposed to the producers, since the consumers are the ones who will most definitely and most efficiently put that money back into the economy? So, even though the wealthy may pay higher taxes... they'll be reaping higher profits from the working and middle classes who suddenly have more disposable income.

    Am I understanding this correctly?

    In the current economic environment, yes, this is the case. Who you want to give taxes to depends on whose behavior you need to stimulate. If the people have money they're itching to spend but producers are too nervous to produce (for whatever reason), you want to stimulate the producers. If the people have no money (like right now), you want to stimulate them so they go spend. If nobody is producing and nobody is consuming, you stimulate both.

    Ideally, what we'd do right now is cut taxes on the middle class (pro-tip: there's never any pro-economy reason to cut taxes on the poor; we do it only because it's "fair" and because it's easier to sell the tax-cuts to the public) and leave the upper class alone. Generally speaking, raising taxes when the economy is eating itself is not a great idea. The problem right now is that the retardly high deficits are actually contributing to the tanking of the economy, and so a revenue-negative tax cut would likely cause more harm than good. Obama, then, is funding his tax cut for the middle class by raising taxes on the wealthy, thus making the plan revenue neutral. A little harm on the supply side, but a lot of help on the demand side.

    As tax policies go, Obama's is fairly well designed and a lot more sophisticated than what we usually get (either "tax cuts for all!" or "tax hikes for the wealthy!").

    Maddie: "I named my feet. The left one is flip and the right one is flop. Oh, and also I named my flip-flops."

    I make tweet.
  • ElJeffeElJeffe Moderator, ClubPA mod
    edited October 2008
    Preacher wrote: »
    ElJeffe wrote: »
    oh god some of my coworkers were talking about voter fraud and Obama the cheater and now I want to lobotomize myself

    Don't you live in liberalfornia?

    Yes, but in Rightwingramento.

    (Actually, Sac is pretty moderate, but Elk Grove is way conservative. Our paper is a poorly-written conservative prattlefest.)

    Maddie: "I named my feet. The left one is flip and the right one is flop. Oh, and also I named my flip-flops."

    I make tweet.
  • PreacherPreacher Registered User regular
    edited October 2008
    ElJeffe wrote: »
    Preacher wrote: »
    ElJeffe wrote: »
    oh god some of my coworkers were talking about voter fraud and Obama the cheater and now I want to lobotomize myself

    Don't you live in liberalfornia?

    Yes, but in Rightwingramento.

    (Actually, Sac is pretty moderate, but Elk Grove is way conservative. Our paper is a poorly-written conservative prattlefest.)

    I was in sacramento once, I can see why you'd hear that kind of madness. Just think you'll be able to feast on their delicious tears on nov 5.

  • monikermoniker Registered User regular
    edited October 2008
    ElJeffe wrote: »
    I wanna make sure that I understand how Obama's tax plan will benefit the US. Given my near retarded lack of understand of economics, this is what I came up with.

    Let's consider the wealthy as those who control the means of production. America enjoys a capitalist economy. So, isn't the whole idea for them to produce, us to consume, so that they can produce more thus allowing us to consume more? We spend money, they make money. So, wouldn't it be logical to give tax breaks to the consumers as opposed to the producers, since the consumers are the ones who will most definitely and most efficiently put that money back into the economy? So, even though the wealthy may pay higher taxes... they'll be reaping higher profits from the working and middle classes who suddenly have more disposable income.

    Am I understanding this correctly?

    In the current economic environment, yes, this is the case. Who you want to give taxes to depends on whose behavior you need to stimulate. If the people have money they're itching to spend but producers are too nervous to produce (for whatever reason), you want to stimulate the producers. If the people have no money (like right now), you want to stimulate them so they go spend. If nobody is producing and nobody is consuming, you stimulate both.

    Ideally, what we'd do right now is cut taxes on the middle class (pro-tip: there's never any pro-economy reason to cut taxes on the poor; we do it only because it's "fair" and because it's easier to sell the tax-cuts to the public) and leave the upper class alone. Generally speaking, raising taxes when the economy is eating itself is not a great idea. The problem right now is that the retardly high deficits are actually contributing to the tanking of the economy, and so a revenue-negative tax cut would likely cause more harm than good. Obama, then, is funding his tax cut for the middle class by raising taxes on the wealthy, thus making the plan revenue neutral. A little harm on the supply side, but a lot of help on the demand side.

    As tax policies go, Obama's is fairly well designed and a lot more sophisticated than what we usually get (either "tax cuts for all!" or "tax hikes for the wealthy!").

    What's next, nationalize the banks? Communism!

    tea-1.jpg
  • ZerokkuZerokku Registered User regular
    edited October 2008
    Jokerman wrote: »
    Gamestop makes me want to burn the stripmall to the ground...

    Try working there =P

    Then again I've found a surprising number of fellow obama supporters that have come into my store, and have add some interesting chats concerning the election. And this is in Arizona. Too bad Obama won't win out in this state since we're pretty die-hard red, as well as McCain having home field advantage.

  • DrakeonDrakeon Registered User regular
    edited October 2008
    ElJeffe wrote: »
    Preacher wrote: »
    ElJeffe wrote: »
    oh god some of my coworkers were talking about voter fraud and Obama the cheater and now I want to lobotomize myself

    Don't you live in liberalfornia?

    Yes, but in Rightwingramento.

    (Actually, Sac is pretty moderate, but Elk Grove is way conservative. Our paper is a poorly-written conservative prattlefest.)

    Really? I live in a suburb of Sac and I didn't think it was too moderate (I thought it was more liberal) but admittedly, my suburb is really conservative, so it may just seem that way in comparison.

    PSN: Drakieon XBL: Drakieon Steam: TheDrakeon
  • GoumindongGoumindong Registered User regular
    edited October 2008
    ElJeffe wrote: »
    (pro-tip: there's never any pro-economy reason to cut taxes on the poor; we do it only because it's "fair" and because it's easier to sell the tax-cuts to the public)

    Protip: Yes there is.

    Pro Explanation: Externalities. When poor people can't pay for shit, they externalize their costs onto everyone else. increasing deadweight loss which increases the aggregate costs to society for those necessary services[and everyones taxes], for those who are able to afford it.

    wbBv3fj.png
  • tofutofu Registered User regular
    edited October 2008
    ElJeffe wrote: »
    Preacher wrote: »
    ElJeffe wrote: »
    oh god some of my coworkers were talking about voter fraud and Obama the cheater and now I want to lobotomize myself

    Don't you live in liberalfornia?

    Yes, but in Rightwingramento.

    (Actually, Sac is pretty moderate, but Elk Grove is way conservative. Our paper is a poorly-written conservative prattlefest.)

    The thing you have to remember about CA is that the liberals are all concentrated on the coast (mostly around the bay area), the rest of the state is quite Republican.

  • JragghenJragghen Registered User regular
    edited October 2008
    tofu wrote: »
    ElJeffe wrote: »
    Preacher wrote: »
    ElJeffe wrote: »
    oh god some of my coworkers were talking about voter fraud and Obama the cheater and now I want to lobotomize myself

    Don't you live in liberalfornia?

    Yes, but in Rightwingramento.

    (Actually, Sac is pretty moderate, but Elk Grove is way conservative. Our paper is a poorly-written conservative prattlefest.)

    The thing you have to remember about CA is that the liberals are all concentrated on the coast (mostly around the bay area), the rest of the state is quite Republican.

    Sacramento actually manages to be the crossroads, from what I've seen. We get a lot of the saner folks from both parties living around here.

    (Pretty much all political talk aside from one good friend of mine who's basically in the "I'm probably voting McCain but more because I'd rather have the executive and legislative branches at one anothers' throats" camp has been probama. Including a lot of registered Republicans).
    Really? I live in a suburb of Sac and I didn't think it was too moderate (I thought it was more liberal) but admittedly, my suburb is really conservative, so it may just seem that way in comparison.

    Folsom is on the conservative side of things ala Elk Grove - we're the more "well to do" suburbs, and our county traditionally goes red. But there's some really, really hardcore conservatives out in the backwater of the state, and we're NOTHING like the people in LA or SF.

    camo_sig2.png
  • PreacherPreacher Registered User regular
    edited October 2008
    Jragghen wrote: »

    Sacramento actually manages to be the crossroads, from what I've seen. We get a lot of the saner folks from both parties living around here.

    (Pretty much all political talk aside from one good friend of mine who's basically in the "I'm probably voting McCain but more because I'd rather have the executive and legislative branches at one anothers' throats" camp has been probama. Including a lot of registered Republicans).

    I hate that line of thought, because in a time of crisis I don't want basic government to battle each other and ultimately do nothing. We had that these last 2 years and look where it fucking got us.

  • PeekingDuckPeekingDuck __BANNED USERS
    edited October 2008
    Taramoor wrote: »
    Australia is probably the most blessed in terms of energy resources over all.

    Yeah, I mean, they've got all that... uh... desert wasteland.

    Solar power?

    Uranium.

  • mxmarksmxmarks Registered User regular
    edited October 2008
    Lou Dobbs is saying that the threats against Obama at the Palin rally are false, because the Secret Service couldn't find anyone, or any witness to it.

    Sooooo, except for the other videos of people saying the same thing, there's no way this can be true!

    XBL: MXrox - PSN: mxmarks - twitch.tv/mxmarks - "Yes, mxmarks is the King of Queens" - Unbreakable Vow
  • PreacherPreacher Registered User regular
    edited October 2008
    mxmarks wrote: »
    Lou Dobbs is saying that the threats against Obama at the Palin rally are false, because the Secret Service couldn't find anyone, or any witness to it.

    Sooooo, except for the other videos of people saying the same thing, there's no way this can be true!

    It also completely ignores the fact that the secret service has been keeping the press from these crowds so they can't accurately identify the people who spouted the garbage.

  • ShadowenShadowen Snores in the morning Registered User regular
    edited October 2008
    Y'know, Lou Dobbs would be awesome if he weren't fucking insane. A couple nights ago he was "ACORN" this and "ACORN" that, and...fuck.

    Campbell Brown, now... (And I'm not just saying she's awesome because she's lovely.)

  • mxmarksmxmarks Registered User regular
    edited October 2008
    This election has me totally, 100% in love with Campbell Brown. I will make a baby with her someday.

    But more importantly:

    McCain on Letterman.
    Biden on Leno.

    What the hell will I do?

    XBL: MXrox - PSN: mxmarks - twitch.tv/mxmarks - "Yes, mxmarks is the King of Queens" - Unbreakable Vow
  • OptimusZedOptimusZed Registered User regular
    edited October 2008
    Shadowen wrote: »
    Y'know, Lou Dobbs would be awesome if he weren't fucking insane. A couple nights ago he was "ACORN" this and "ACORN" that, and...fuck.
    Lou Dobbs is the owner of the blackest soul on tv.

    We're reading Rifts. You should too. You know you want to. On Hiatus!

    Any gamers in the Danville, PA area? PM me if you're interested in some tabletop gaming.
  • monikermoniker Registered User regular
    edited October 2008
    Shadowen wrote: »
    Y'know, Lou Dobbs would be awesome if he weren't fucking insane. A couple nights ago he was "ACORN" this and "ACORN" that, and...fuck.

    Campbell Brown, now... (And I'm not just saying she's awesome because she's lovely.)

    ACORN registers impoverished people to vote. Many illegal aliens are impoverished. Therefore, by the transitive property, Lou Dobbs must smash. QED

    tea-1.jpg
  • monikermoniker Registered User regular
    edited October 2008
    mxmarks wrote: »
    This election has me totally, 100% in love with Campbell Brown. I will make a baby with her someday.

    But more importantly:

    McCain on Letterman.
    Biden on Leno.

    What the hell will I do?

    Letterman. McCain announced his bid on that show then ran out on Dave last appearance leading to quite the scathing response on Letterman's part. It should be interesting.

    Alternatively: Tivo/internet

    tea-1.jpg
  • PreacherPreacher Registered User regular
    edited October 2008
    Ok McCain supporters this is what mainstream america is seeing you guys as.

    http://www.daily-times.com/news/ci_10731717

    It's moved beyond the 2 minute hate.

  • PreacherPreacher Registered User regular
    edited October 2008
    I'd watch Biden, letterman will be a softball mccain knob slobber fest. I'm sure Joe the Plumber will be the topic of conversation.

  • werehippywerehippy Registered User regular
    edited October 2008
    ElJeffe wrote: »
    Ideally, what we'd do right now is cut taxes on the middle class (pro-tip: there's never any pro-economy reason to cut taxes on the poor; we do it only because it's "fair" and because it's easier to sell the tax-cuts to the public) and leave the upper class alone. Generally speaking, raising taxes when the economy is eating itself is not a great idea. The problem right now is that the retardly high deficits are actually contributing to the tanking of the economy, and so a revenue-negative tax cut would likely cause more harm than good. Obama, then, is funding his tax cut for the middle class by raising taxes on the wealthy, thus making the plan revenue neutral. A little harm on the supply side, but a lot of help on the demand side.

    As tax policies go, Obama's is fairly well designed and a lot more sophisticated than what we usually get (either "tax cuts for all!" or "tax hikes for the wealthy!").

    I'm going to have to disagree with that. The economic thinking behind cutting taxes for the poor (which, depending on how you define poor, is effectively a check cut directly to them in the form a return versus a lower tax bill) is exactly the same as the economic rationale for cutting taxes on the middle class: trickle up economics gives you exponentially more economic growth than trickle down economics.

    And as to raising taxes on the wealthy, in general it's probably true that no one's taxes should go up during a down turn, but given the fact that the stock market is in turmoil, money markets aren't much better, and increasingly the wealthy are just rolling their excess capital into extremely safe vehicles (near zero yield treasury bonds, etc) I think there's a case to be made that taking a part of that as added government revenue, which can then be plowed back into more effective avenues of economic growth (pretty much any form of government spending, including the tax cuts they're offsetting) will do significantly more to turn the economy around than the damage done by a relatively small tax hike on a infinitesimal fraction of the population.

    And that's leaving aside there's preciously little in the way of actual proof that people are nearly as concerned about their actual marginal tax rate as conservative pundits like to pretend.

  • ElJeffeElJeffe Moderator, ClubPA mod
    edited October 2008
    Goumindong wrote: »
    ElJeffe wrote: »
    (pro-tip: there's never any pro-economy reason to cut taxes on the poor; we do it only because it's "fair" and because it's easier to sell the tax-cuts to the public)

    Protip: Yes there is.

    Pro Explanation: Externalities. When poor people can't pay for shit, they externalize their costs onto everyone else. increasing deadweight loss which increases the aggregate costs to society for those necessary services[and everyones taxes], for those who are able to afford it.

    Well, true to a point. You basically want taxes on the lower class to be low enough that they can afford as much as possible, but non-zero so they have some sort of mindshare buy-in to the concept of taxes. Even so, the poor are still going to be using social programs, so trying to eliminate that is futile. At any rate, when you find your optimal tax rate for the po' folks, you pretty much leave it there. You don't fuck around with it to game the system in the same way you do with the middle and upper class, because there's not enough money there to make a difference as regards supply and demand. Which was the point I was trying to get at.

    Maddie: "I named my feet. The left one is flip and the right one is flop. Oh, and also I named my flip-flops."

    I make tweet.
  • monikermoniker Registered User regular
    edited October 2008
    Preacher wrote: »
    I'd watch Biden, letterman will be a softball mccain knob slobber fest. I'm sure Joe the Plumber will be the topic of conversation.

    So you don't watch Letterman, I take it.

    tea-1.jpg
  • tofutofu Registered User regular
    edited October 2008
    Jragghen wrote: »
    tofu wrote: »
    ElJeffe wrote: »
    Preacher wrote: »
    ElJeffe wrote: »
    oh god some of my coworkers were talking about voter fraud and Obama the cheater and now I want to lobotomize myself

    Don't you live in liberalfornia?

    Yes, but in Rightwingramento.

    (Actually, Sac is pretty moderate, but Elk Grove is way conservative. Our paper is a poorly-written conservative prattlefest.)

    The thing you have to remember about CA is that the liberals are all concentrated on the coast (mostly around the bay area), the rest of the state is quite Republican.

    Sacramento actually manages to be the crossroads, from what I've seen. We get a lot of the saner folks from both parties living around here.

    You're actually right, but Sacramento is the exception rather than the rule. The Tahoe area is also usually democratic if I remember correctly.

  • ShadowenShadowen Snores in the morning Registered User regular
    edited October 2008
    mxmarks wrote: »
    This election has me totally, 100% in love with Campbell Brown. I will make a baby with her someday.

    My favorite joke someone said from when she was spitting nails at Palin being kept from the press was that her husband must be getting some earth-shattering hatesex.

    Like...
    SHOT ON a TV; Campbell Brown is railin' against Palin on CNN, though there is no "LIVE" in the corner.

    PULL BACK to reveal we are in the BROWNS' KITCHEN. MR. BROWN* is making tea. As he gets the sugar, CLOSE IN on his hands. They are trembling slightly.

    CUT TO the DRIVEWAY, low to the ground. A CAR pulls up. The camera is at wheel-height. The driver door opens, and a BOOTED FOOT hits the ground in concert with a SCARE CHORD.

    INSIDE, Mr. Brown is spooning sugar into his tea. A car door slams, audible from inside the kitchen. He jumps nervously, dropping his spoon...

    *Yes, I'm aware that she didn't take her husband's name. The joke in this sketch is that he took hers. :P

This discussion has been closed.