Thursday, November 11, 2010

Your Preference is, well, Your Preference

The Legislative What?


God Almighty, again with preference deals.

For those of you outside Victoria, and for those of you inside Victoria who are comfortably huddled under a rock, there's a state election campaign raging, well, stuttering along, in this state at the moment.

Inevitably there's talk of preference deals with the resurgent Greens. The news this morning is that the Greens are apparently directing preferences to the Liberals. The Greens have refused to officially verify this.

But here's the rub:

NOBODY HAS TO DIRECT THEIR PREFERENCES IN ANY DIRECTION SUGGESTED BY ANYBODY ELSE, EVER!

Just because it suggests something on the how to vote card, doesn't mean you have to do it, even if it's the how to vote card of your preferred party. The media, even the ABC, just keeps rolling out the same line about 'preference deals' and 'directing preferences' which confuses many voters about where their votes are going. YOU control your preferences, not any of the parties.

Now, carry on.

98 comments:

eat my shorts said...

I prefer beer.

Just sayin'.

Ramon Insertnamehere said...

That's true to a point Bob, but most studies indicate Australians follow HTV cards pretty closely.

So if the Greens issue "open" HTV cards in marginal Labor seats, then there is a good chance the Libs will pick those seats up.

And the Victorian Greens have already indicated they're prepared to a deal with the Libs if there is a hung parliament.

My message - if you want to keep the Tories out, vote Labor.

My second message is - if you wash down all your medications with white wine, you can get a nice little buzz on.

Lewd Bob said...

most studies indicate Australians follow HTV cards pretty closely

Oh, I agree completely, but I think people are often under the misconception that they HAVE to follow them. Or at the very least it becomes an unconscious action.

wari lasi said...

Two educated gents discussing a system that virtually nobody understands.

I can't quote stats but at some stage recently (last 5 years or so) there was a survey of registered voters who were asked to name our system of voting and whether they understood how it works. The numbers were woefully disappointing. So much for an "informed electorate".

I think Ramon is right, a big percentage of people follow HTV cards because they don't get it and just want to show party loyalty. By not understanding how the preferential system works (certainly in the case of a primary vote for a candidate who has very little chance of winning) they basically get tricked into voting for someone else.

Alex said...

It's hard to believe a lot of people are that naive. Even when I had absolutely no interest in politics, I still new I could direct preferences however I wanted (Understanding precisely how the votes were tallied is another matter). I could be wrong, but my guess is that confusion is less of a problem than laziness, apathy and blind loyalty.

wari lasi said...

Problem is Alex, apart from me of course, this site is generally attended by people with some intelligence.

Tragically, the average person out there is a dickhead.

Try to get involved in scrutineering at a polling place one day. Then you pick up all the intricacies of how a ballot exhausts etc. Not to mention the fun bickering between scrutineers from different camps. "That's informal". "No it isn't, there's a clear indication of preference". You'd be surprised how many people write stupid shit on their ballot papers, like amateur anarchists. And the number of people who just put a tick or cross next to one candidate, when it says "number every box" all over the place.

Lewd Bob said...

the average person out there is a dickhead

A quote for the ages.

wari lasi said...

So you believe that to be an uncharitable position Bob?

Lewd Bob said...

On the contrary, I wholeheartedly concur.

Alex said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
Alex said...

Point well made, Wari.

Dr. Golf said...

Seems the parties are having a bit each way. Only the ideological die-hards get annoyed when their party makes a deal with the devil. And no matter how pissed these guys get, they're not going to vote for anyone else.

I've got a theory that the DLP picks up votes from morons who mistake it for the ALP.

Melba said...

I wish we talked about sex a bit more often on here.

wari lasi said...

Or the weather Melba?

Alex said...

Considering how often these threads wander off topic, Melba, you could always go ahead and get the ball rolling (or put the canoe in the water, so to speak). It's not the same without Perseus, though, I suppose.

Ramon Insertnamehere said...

How about we talk about the transfer-quota system used to elect Senators, Melbs.

Nuthing sexier that that!

squib said...

Ok, Melba. Would anyone here fuck a watermelon?

I'm reading Suttree by Cormac McCarthy and a character gets sent to prison for deflowering a watermelon patch. This got me thinking, if you were a man, what would it be like?

Lewd Bob said...

Seedy.

wari lasi said...

Squib. I believe it's cormac mccarthy. Doesn't he object to all forms of punctuation? I've only read "All the pretty horses" and sometimes the dialogue is bloody near impossible to follow.

Perhaps he really did remove the flowers from the watermelon patch?

Alex said...

if you were a man, what would it be like?

Until I got to this bit, my mind was racing to find a way to even attempt such an act. Even for a bloke, I reckon it'd be a challenge - since the melon would turn to pulp.

You sure he didn't literally deflower it? Cause that may ruin a crop and put someone considerably out of pocket.

Puss In Boots said...

Perhaps you could carve something from the flesh, Alex? Would be difficult though. And mushy.

squib said...

Lewd, oh dear

Wari, Cormac is God. I loved All the Pretty Horses. Have you tried The Road?

Alex, no, he had hot watermelon sex

Melba said...

Oh go Bob, that was good.

Thanks squib for taking my comment and running with it.

I imagine it would cold (maybe) and slushy. I'm also guessing the dude wouldn't have to penetrate the rind.

This is not quite what I had in mind.

wari lasi said...

he had hot watermelon sex

Now that's hilarious.

Not read The Road Squib, but I did enjoy Pretty Horses. I just don't think the lack of punctuation lent it anything extra, just made it more difficult to read.

Now I'm off for a one-day-late Rememberance Day bash at the Aussie High Comm. Got to lose the kid first.

Lewd Bob said...

Oh go Bob, that was good

And only 2 minutes after Squibs comment.

Swish.


I'm off for a one-day-late Rememberance Day bash at the Aussie High Comm

Say hi from me.

Lewd Bob said...

Fuck it, left off an apostrophe. Fuck, fuck, fuck, fuck, fuck, fuck, fuck!

Alex said...

Well, a Google-Image search for "watermelon fucking" has expanded my horizons (make sure you have safe search turned off), even if I didn't see any melon-based phallic instruments. I guess, if you're that way inclined, it's easier to hunt up an ear of corn or something.

For some reason, this all reminds me of a chap I went to school with who had a permanent erection, frequently messed his trousers and occasionally got caught having relations with inanimate objects at the hostel where he stayed. No melons that I'm aware of, though.

Ramon Insertnamehere said...

Didn't one of catlick's female friends have an intimate relationship with a zucchini?

And why does nobody want to talk about the Senate's transfer-quota system?

wari lasi said...

Because we don't get it Ramon. Unrepresentative Swill! That is perhaps my all time favourite political quote.

Alex said...

Here's a political question for you, Ramon: Why is Aung San Suu Kyi still alive? Are martyrs that much more dangerous than prisoners, or is it something else?

Lewd Bob said...

Allow me to answer that one Alex.

She's a zombie.

Kettle said...

Seedy.

Bloody funny, Bob.

This is not quite what I had in mind.

How about this, Melbs: where does everyone stand on swinging? (as in the sessual kind, not the voting kind.)

Alex said...

Bob: Well, I certainly wasn't expecting that.

Kettle: Personally, it's not something I've ever had to consider; but theoretically, I don't have a problem with it. Swinging, group sex, whatever floats your boat. I even knew a girl who taught her dog the peanut-butter trick. The only thing I baulk at is the violent and degrading S&M stuff. There's got to be something wrong with those people.

Pepsi said...

I even knew a girl who taught her dog the peanut-butter trick

Was she related to Joel Monaghan, Alex ?

I like the pirate ship on google today.

Kettle said...

I like the pirate ship too, Pepsi. Apparently it's the 160th anniversary of Robert Louis Stevenson's birth/death/first whiskey or something.

Incidentally I just bought Treasure Island yesterday. It's meant to be the greatest adventure story of all time. I don't know; I used to think A Country Practice was.

Alex I ended up on a table at a dinner once with a very lovely S&M participant (you know how some dinner conversations go). It seemed to be all very consensual, what she talked about, and only once had she had to whip someone she had worked with 9 to 5.

What about key parties? Do the young people still do that these days?

Alex said...

Pepsi: Joel who?

Kettle: If you ended up literally on the table with an S&M participant, than you go to wilder dinner parties than I. Speaking of, I don't know anyone who claims to have been to a party where people actually swapped keys. Has anyone here?

And back to S&M: while I can see how some people would get off on whips and candles and bondage and stuff, the thought of being slapped and tossed around, chocked and spat on just seems a wee bit off to me.

eat my shorts said...

How about this, Melbs: where does everyone stand on swinging? (as in the sessual kind, not the voting kind.)

I prefer beer.

Ramon Insertnamehere said...

Swinging?

What, are we suddenly in the 1970s now?

squib said...

Note to self: never ask to stay at Kettle's place

Kettle said...

Nice pretending you're not interested in things of a sessual nature, EMS, Ramon and Squib. You'd prefer beer - indeed EMS!

Why, you three are the sexiest here.*

* In addition to Melba, Bob, Puss, Alex, Wari, Mr E, Dr G, Perseus, Patchie, Witchy, Fad MD, RandomGit, shitbmxrider, MCL, Boogeyman and all the other dear, sexy people.

Melba said...

Hear hear EMS, but I prefer wine.

Negotiating sex with one other person has always been more than enough for moi.

I'm quite pleased though that comments went from 12 to 40 after I changed the sujet de jour.

Pepsi said...

Sex is much more entertaining then politics Melbs.

Alex - the ex-Canberra Raiders player who had a photo taken with his daks around his knees leaning against a window/screen door on the floor, with a poor doggie making a meal (with gusto)of his doodle. The pix went viral a few weeks back thanks to a fake Tweetie pretending to be a midget Lib Pollie with a Sesame Street name.

Was a bit of a scandal up this way recently.

wari lasi said...

of his doodle

Ha ha! Haven't heard it called a doodle for ages Pepsi. It was my childhood euphemism.

That whole Joel Monaghan incident is really quite tragic. He played for Australia and had a great future. But as the old joke goes, "A bloke shags one goat ..."

It was indeed a successful tangent Melbs. Congrats!

Alex said...

Melba: Be careful, or well start looking to you every time there's a lull around here.

Pepsi: Wow, either I hadn't heard about that or I've started subconsciously tuning out sports-related scandals. So, he lost his job over it, did he? Seems a bit rough if all he did was let a dog lick him.

Also: a fake Tweetie pretending to be a midget Lib Pollie with a Sesame Street name.

I really want to believe there's a Liberal politician who's last name is Snuffleupagus.

wari lasi said...

And while we're digressing, my cousin put this up on facebook an hour ago. I don't normally go for chick stuff, but hey, we've all got a granny.

Alex said...

Not sure why that qualifies as "chick stuff", Wari, but okay none the less. I also had a look at the bodybuilding video that was linked underneath. Is it my imagination, or are the women depicted built more like strippers than weightlifters.

wari lasi said...

I don't know if it's sexist Alex, but I can't stand the way they look. And yep, they put them in these skimpy bikinis and lather them in fake tan. But my lady doesn't like the look of male body builders either, and they do pretty well the same thing with them.

She's a cool old chook isn't she? I thought she might have a bloody heart attack or something. Good set of lungs for an octogenarian.

Alex said...

I tend to get a bit aggravated with the formulaic confected drama that always seems to be a part of those reality TV competition thingies. But yes, the old lady and her singing were ace.

And I'm just noting that if freakishly huge muscles are the goal for men in that sport (or whatever it is), then why not the same for women? I don't know. It just seems like judging male weight-lifters on how much they can press and women on poise and elegance while they do it. Or something.

wari lasi said...

Or something

That about sums it up.

To each his (her?) own.

Puss In Boots said...

Seems a bit rough if all he did was let a dog lick him.

I don't understand comments like this. I'm not directly attacking you, Alex, but there were also comments like this on the news stories I read on the subject.

How is letting a dog lick your genitals ok? It's bestiality. The dog can't consent to the sex act. It would be the same thing if some sick fuck smeared some jam on their dick and had a baby/toddler suck it off or something. The toddler doesn't know what's going on any more than the dog does. It's disgusting, and it's sexual abuse.

Just because the animal doesn't know what's going on doesn't make it ok. He should definitely have gotten the sack. Animal abuse is not right in any form. And your friend who smears peanut butter on herself is equally as disgusting. "Whatever floats your boat" doesn't cut it when there are other parties involved who can't consent.

I just can't believe people think it's not a big deal!

Lewd Bob said...

I knew this preferential voting post was going to be divisive.

Ramon Insertnamehere said...

That reminds me.

When I get back, I must post a long piece about Hegel.

And his bowel problems.

Alex said...

Puss, if you made a child sleep in a box in the backyard and walked it to the neighbours house every day so it could shit on their lawn, that would be abusive too. But it's not for a dog, because dogs are not human children and shouldn't be thought of as such. It's like how many people eat meat and wear leather because they come from animals and not from children. In most respects, I think it would generally be wrong to treat a child (or any person) "like an animal", so I don't see why the two are directly comparable.

Also, animals seem to engage in sex acts all the time without any form of explicit consent. Is it abuse if you let a dog hump your leg? Look, I'm not attempting to advocate cruelty here, and I'd definitely feel differently about somebody who constrained an animal for the purpose of fucking it; but I just don't see a big difference between letting a dog lick your crotch and letting it lick three inches away on your leg/hip/stomach.

Which, incidentally, I find bloody revolting. I hate being licked by animals anywhere.

Puss In Boots said...

Does it make a difference if he was holding the animal's head, Alex? In the photo, you can clearly see he has a hold of the dog so it can't get away.

I just think using animals for your sexual gratification in any way is bestiality, and it shouldn't be tolerated.

And I agree with you on the animal licking thing. It's gross anyway. I actually have to look away in movies and TV shows when they show animals licking people's faces. It makes me want to vomit.

Alex said...

Well, bestiality is just a word; so I think saying that "the use of animals for sexual gratification shouldn't be tolerated because it's bestiality" is kind of circular logic. And of course, the question isn't really whether it's disgusting (I also find coprophilia disgusting) but why it's wrong.

But yes, if he was holding it's head so that it couldn't get away, that changes things entirely, from my point of view. Fuck him. He deserved what he got.

And yes, my stomach also turns a little when I see people "kiss" their dogs.

Puss In Boots said...

It's wrong because the animal can't consent, not just because it's bestiality. How does the person getting the animal to lick their genitals know that the animal would still be up for it if it actually knew what it was doing?

Alex said...

Again, I think you're projecting human rationalisation onto an animal. The dog knows that it's licking someone, and for a dog - which, being a dog, does not require basic human dignity - I think that's all it needs to be concerned with. If it's happy to stand there and do it, without restraint, then I don't see it as cruel or abusive.

Puss In Boots said...

I think we'll have to agree to disagree on this one.

Alex said...

Cool.

Mr E Discharge said...

Maybe a little music
to break the tension.

Kettle said...

[Heh heh Mr E.]

Personally I'd rather talk about 'swinging' (sorry Ramon, Squib, EMS, Melba) than dogs licking hairy, sweaty, human pink bits, but you know, whatever.

Alex said...

Well, fire away, Kettle.

Kettle said...

Ah bugger Alex, you called my bluff. Busted custard Kettle!

Alex said...

Aw, I thought you were going to tell us all about the mind-expanding experiences you and Mr Kettle had had, or were contemplating having, or something

Kettle said...

I was going to except Ramon reminded me that swinging went out in the '70s so it's just two single beds for Mr Kettle and me, I'm afraid.

Alex said...

Curse you, Ramon.

Mr E Discharge said...

Kettle,
Be assured that "swinging" is still happening in parts of deepest Wantirna.

Kettle said...

Ah dear Mr E, I am very glad, theoretically of course, to hear that is the case.

Now of course I'm dying to know how you know!

Lewd Bob said...

I don't meant to denigrate the practice at all, but I thought swinging these days was generally done by people with about 4 teeth in their head.

Course, I could be wrong.

wari lasi said...

I knew this preferential voting post was going to be divisive.

You're a funny bastard Bob. Keep it up.

Puss/Alex. It got a bit out of control there. He was pissed and being a dickhead in front of his mates. I don't believe the dog came to any harm and I don't for one second think Joel is into bestiality. I know a shit load of people who've done really stupid things to impress their mates when they're pissed. It didn't cost them their livelyhood, or in fact their entire career. That's the point here. Just because he's high profile, should an error of judgement that caused no one any harm cost him that much?

I'd have a beer with Joel Monaghan, but not the cunt that publicised the picture. That was a low act.

squib said...

I know a shit load of people who've done really stupid things to impress their mates when they're pissed.

In what world does doggy fellatio impress one's mates?

wari lasi said...

Touche Squib, certainly not my cup of tea either. But I bet they were all laughing, and the primary point I'm trying to make is that it caused no one any harm. It was just stupid. I think he deserves the ridicule but a man's livelihood is a very big deal.

Pepsi said...

He quit the Raiders and has gone off to play Super League in the UK where his brother is, its not exactly destroying his livelihood.

Privacy is a myth. It no longer exists.

One thing I did like about the whole thing was even though he was a bit of a sooky la la about it when he quit, he put his hand up and took responsbility for his own actions and accepted the consequences.

Puss In Boots said...

I think I will have to agree to disagree with you too, Wari.

I applaud the guy who posted the photo, and I think Furner's comment of, "the perils of the media and social media today are a great example of why you shouldn’t do it" completely misses the mark. No, you douchebag, you shouldn't do it because it's wrong, disgusting, and abuse of an animal.

Alex said...

So, did he quit or get sacked? Because, animal cruelty aside, I guess that raises the question of when it's okay to sack people for stuff they do outside of work.

Of course, if he had a contract that explicitly stated he mustn't get photographed with his penis inside a furry animal, he's probably sunk anyway.

Melba said...

Oooh, and I thought this thread was dead. It lives on.

In the course of my work, we tell the story to schoolkids (high school, natch) about a boy who got the reputation of having fingered a dog. He was pissed, and it might have been a dare, anyway, that's what he was left with. "The guy who fingered a dog." It's one of our little cautionary tales. AND we also advise that sex with animals is wrong because they can't give consent. AND we also advise that sex is not just penis-vagina intercourse; there are a whole range of sexual activities that constitute sex. So technically you can argue that dog fellatio IS sex and therefore IS bestiality, and therefore illegal.

[breathes]

Alex said...

There's no question that it's illegal. But don't forget that most forms of non penis-vagina intercourse were illegal at some point. Just pointing out that morality should shape the law and not the other way around.

Melba said...

Alex you seem to be mixing your arguments. The history of sexual mores that you refer to, and changes that have occurred over time, pertains to human sex.

Sex with animals has always been seen (at he very least through the lens of Judeo-Christian-Islamic traditions) as "against nature" and most people find it abhorrent.

It seems to me you are suggesting that because bestiality is illegal we are averse to it? Not that it is illegal because we find it unacceptable and against our morals?

I hope I've misunderstood and that you'll clarify, or have we all had enough?

Music Mr E? Some Wantirna Swing?

Lewd Bob said...

I'm not arguing in favour of Alex and Wari necessarily, however I don't think the dog suffered during the act which I think is the most important point.

On the contrary, he managed a meal.

Alex said...

Melba, I try not to look exclusively to Judeo-Christian-Islamic tradition for moral guidance and I don't agree that bestiality as a crime against nature is some sort of inherent, unquestionable truth because those sorts of traditions say so. That's the same line of logic that the religious use to argue against homosexuality and abortion and anything else they don't like. I don't even think there's any sort of universally or near-universal consensus on the subject, considering bestiality is legal in a number of countries throughout Europe, Asia and South America.

The point I was making is that when you're debating the morality of an action, the legal status of said action is largely irrelevant.

And I agree with Bob. The welfare of the animal is my main concern.

Melba said...

I'm not sure the argument about the dog not being hurt is really the point. With some children who are sexually abused, but "gently" and without violence, with coercion or whatever, it could be argued they aren't "hurt" - indeed, some people would argue they are loved.

Isn't it up to the human (in the case of the dog and human) and the adult (in the case of the child and adult) to take the higher moral ground and look out for those that are younger or under our care?

Alex said...

I think I made the point earlier that animals are a long, long way from being human children - and as such, I don't think a direct comparison is appropriate.

In my opinion, human beings (including children and those of limited capacity) are entitled to a standard of treatment that is different to all other creatures. It's species discrimination, but it's the only way society can function. Otherwise you'd be up for murder every time you swatted a bug and stupid shit like that.

wari lasi said...

Otherwise you'd be up for murder every time you swatted a bug and stupid shit like that.

Try living with a Buddhist.

Puss and Melba - I'm somewhat reluctant to go on with this lest I be seen as condoning bestiality. Which I most certainly am not. He was pissed and being a dickhead is all I wanted to get across. I don't think he's a serial pooch shagger, and most importantly of all, no harm came to anybody, except Joel Monaghan of course.

Melba said...

Yes, Alex animals are a long way from being human however societies and laws exist to protect animals because some humans can't behave themselves when it comes to exploiting and hurting animals. There are many similarities between animals and children in the way they can be mistreated by adult humans. I'm not going to get into the differences between insects and dogs.

I take your point but I think the argument needs to be made from the perspective of 'human-ness' (if not 'humane-ness')to take it off the track of strictly a scientific/literal/cold/legal interpretation. There needs to be pity and sadness and disgust and discomfort, but I admit there might also be curiosity, arousal, interest in the range of human reactions. I don't think it's enough to say animals aren't human so that's that. I don't think it's enough to say the animal wasn't hurt so it's ok. It's not that simple but you seem to be simplifying it like a mathematical equation.

My reaction to it (and I've just seen the pic) is not one of visceral disgust. I think it's sad for the men that they get themselves into that situation, and with others standing around and watching and taking photos, it really will stick to him. No one can know the effect to the dog but that's why we have animal protection; to look after them. Saying there was no harm done could be applied to the sitation where a person is drugged and molested while unconscious. No harm done, really. Right?

Alex said...

Saying there was no harm done could be applied to the sitation where a person is drugged and molested while unconscious. No harm done, really. Right?

Absolutely not. See my previous comments on differing standards between humans and animals. And if the bug thing went too far, consider that in Korea and other places, people eat dogs.

Please be aware that I'm not trying to defend the actions of this particular incident, as I know not one skerrick more than what's written in this thread. The thrust of my argument is that I won't call something morally wrong just because I find it repulsive.

Also, I am opposed to most acts of bestiality, especially if they involve restraining (see previous comments), penetrating or forcibly inserting part of the animal into your body - because I believe that constitutes unwarranted cruelty. However, if you think a dog that spends half the day licking things, including its own genitals, will become traumatised because a human allowed (different to forced) it to lick theirs; then I think you're more than likely projecting human qualities onto the animal that just aren't there.

Melba said...

This will be my last comment because hey I've really got stuff to do, BUT I don't think I'm saying the dog would be traumatised (if it wasn't restrained) and was licking his dick freely (I don't think you could say peanut butter being placed as bait is entrapment? Because you can't entrap an animal, right? Lure?) (Speaking of restraint, the dude is holding at least one of the dog's ears; whether it's so he can drag it off if it uses its teeth or to hold it in position, who knows?)

Hell, I could keep going forever but it's getting circular.

Let's change the subject again. What colour is your crinoline Alex?

Alex said...

Yeah, sorry, I got carried away. I generally don't get to debate much.

It's dark. Probably would have been black at some point. I'm generally more of a pants person though. How about you and yours?

Melba said...

Mine's big and flouncy and yellow. I have double mesh petticoats as well.

Alex said...

Very nice.

Unfortunately, I think Petticoat Junction may have ruined petticoats for me on a subconscious level.

Do you have anything else that's big and flouncy? I think I could do with more flounce in my day.

Melba said...

It's a good word. Flouncy. I like it.

Nah, the rest of my wardrobe is not very flouncy. Just the crinoline and petticoats that match.

Alex said...

Agreed, Melba. More flouncy all round.

Kettle said...

Dear ladies, you simply must have parasols to go with your crinolines. There are all sorts of marvellous flouncy parasols on the internets.

Alex, I look forward to your next avatar incarnation.

PS. I don't mean to sound flippant; I'm actually looking for an umbrella at the moment. My parents (God love them) keep giving me the same animal print umbrella every third Christmas. I won't survive another animal print Christmas assault.

Alex said...

Oh, Kettle. Crinolines? Petticoats? what're your views on flouncy?

Kettle said...

Dear Alex, the flouncier the better. With regard to my crinoline, I want to sweep up Kuiper belt objects as I pass.

Alex said...

I'm reminded of a woman I saw the other day with an umbrella that came down over her head and shoulders like a little bubble. It had a sort of frilly trim that I imagine was for directing run-off so you could see out properly. I don't know where you get them, but I thought it was pretty neat.

Melba said...

Alex those brollies were around in the '70s. They were so funky, like you were walking around in a bubble.

Alex said...

Melba, you city people were so spoilt with your funky bubble bumbershoots and what not.

Lord Gravy said...

I'm going to vote:
1 Labor
2 Watermelons
3 Petticoat Junction
4 Dog Fellatio

Because democracy is important.