Elizabeth Perkins: ‘Don’t tweet Barack if you don’t want responses’

We’re sorry we missed this yesterday, and we’re even more sorry to learn that actress Elizabeth Perkins is not an avid Twitchy reader. If she were, she’d know that it —whatever it is — is all about HIM, always. When astronaut Neil Armstrong died, @BarackObama marked the occasion with a photo of Barack Obama. The late Daniel Inouye was remembered with a photo of Barack Obama. The White House marked the Rosa Parks anniversary with a photo of Barack Obama. Pearl Harbor? Barack Obama.

Amy Lutz understands. Yesterday it was about same-sex marriage, and @BarackObama — the Twitter account that’s run by “independent organization” OFA but just happens to share the president’s name — tweeted a photo of Obama to promote #MarriageEquality.

That tweet was enough for Perkins to declare Lutz “not the brightest bulb.”

Perkins has some free advice for those who’d rather not be beset by Obama trolls like her: do not tweet Barack.

Do not tweet Barack, and do not engage Perkins. She’s done doing things for people’s amusement. She’s an actress, not an entertainer.

Those are some aggressive tweets. She must have been really upset when that guy who opposed same-sex marriage was elected in 2008.

  • https://twitter.com/Captain_Cy_kun Cy

    Of course she doesn’t want equality. Not wanting the government to validate everyone’s relationship is racist and homophobic, duh.

  • http://whatandever.blogspot.com/ Osumashi Kinyobe

    Elizabeth Perkins hasn’t been paying attention to the Narcissist-in-Chief and his free-spending ways. Furthermore, “millions” are NOT being denied their rights as (a) they possess all the franchises of American citizens (b) marriage cannot be re-defined for the less than two percent who want to “marry” as some sort of social experiment/middle finger.

    • http://twitter.com/thetugboatphil TugboatPhil

      And no one in the “news” industry has brought up this point since the argument has begun. The left’s posit that it is a right being denied is taken with full faith and credit.

      • http://whatandever.blogspot.com/ Osumashi Kinyobe

        Consider the restrictions on marriage that already exist (age, mental status, ect). Consider also how marriage was seen as passe or unnecessary. What changed?

    • Hiraghm

      (c) – people afflicted with homosexuality CAN marry. They have no more restrictions than I have.

      I tweeted @elizbethperkins and asked her to marry me. If she refuses, she’s denying me basic equality.

      “The smallest minority on earth is the individual. Those who deny individual rights cannot claim to be defenders of minorities.”

      Ayn Rand

      • E Quilibrate

        And then,”Atlas Shrugged”.

      • Hiraghm

        Two hours now and still no reply to my marriage proposal. Can I sue her for emotional distress? I’m being denied basic equality here!

        • nc

          She must be a hater.

        • WWMD

          You are an idiot

      • WWMD

        Really? I suppose your answer is yes they can marry to opposite sex

      • http://whatandever.blogspot.com/ Osumashi Kinyobe

        As marriage cannot be re-defined, marriage is used in the loosest and incorrect sense of the word.

        She has not replied?

    • WWMD

      You lie

      • http://whatandever.blogspot.com/ Osumashi Kinyobe


  • Scott Carroll

    I can’t imagine being so personally invested in a politician that I run to defend him no matter the charge. There is an eerie cult of personality that pervades leftist ideology. For all their talk of egalitarianism and the common man they always seem to strive to put someone on a pedestal. To confer Most Favored Politician status on a chosen Messiah.

    Rare is the individual who can eschew belief in God and not rush to fill that void with something material. The human being is a social creature. We yearn for community. We yearn to exercise the muscle of faith. We yearn to find patterns and meaning in things that sometimes have none. Religion understands this. Whether you believe in it or not religion fulfills those yearnings in mankind.

    Those yearnings still exist even in those who have turned their back on religion. All leftists, even religious ones, must have those yearnings filled. They just choose to fill those needs with secular beliefs like humanism, environmentalism, tribalism, narcissism, feminism, socialism, atheism etc. Leftism is the most dogmatic religion in the world, look at how quickly Sister Perkins came to the defense of the Messiah against a heretic.

    • seek456

      I think they all realize they have to defend him, cause damn, there stands a naked emperor. They’re just not honest enough to admit it.

      • RightThinking1

        I am inclined to think that it is not an ‘honesty’ problem, but something far more pathological. Their minds have actually been co-opted, ergo, all liberals are (at least) just slightly insane .I do not say this as hyperbole, they have lost (at least some) ability to think rationally.

        • http://twitter.com/yahneverknowCB yahneverknow

          I’ve always said it’s less pathological or a matter of sanity… It’s actually an addiction to pretending to do everything “for the common good,” regardless of reality or logic.

          They cannot admit they have a problem, so must defend their stupid sheeplistic choices.

          It does appear to outsiders as pathology, insanity, etc., but ultimately they made a CHOICE to think that way and do not have the fortitude or character to own up to their bad choices and get out of the cycle of addiction.

          I am a former tree-hugging, animal-loving liberal who finally woke up and broke free. I still love trees and animals, but I approach it all with rationality and free thought instead of using the talking points and rabid, fang-baring, hyped-up-on-political-correctness arguments.

          They need to take their blinders off; but they must be removed by the individual. You can’t knock them off ‘cuz they’ll get all pissed off if you do and will use duct tape + superglue to put them back on.

          • trixiewoobeans

            Hey! Me too! And you’re right, blinder’s must be removed by one’s self. You have to decide to face the gritty reality and truths of life, and I recognized Liberals had rocketed past their prime directives and into insanity.

        • http://1389blog.com/ 1389AD

          Why modern liberals are always 100% wrong about everything – and no, this is not an exaggeration.

        • WWMD

          Our minds are co-oped with facts. None of which are found here in this site

      • http://www.facebook.com/brett.mcmicken Brett McMicken

        well, you have to remember that these are the same people who consider the kennedys america’s “royalty.”

    • $18912735

      cult of personality – nailed it.

    • marylandman

      Please stop comparing secular beliefs to religion. Religion is a fairy tale. No comparison.

      • http://twitter.com/thetugboatphil TugboatPhil

        But monkeys crawling out of the swamp and turning into people, and lizards turning into birds is science, right?

        • http://www.facebook.com/luke.givens.963 Luke Givens

          It might be a brilliant idea for you to summon all of your brain cells and actually try reading a book on evolution before spewing…. um… whatever the hell that you were trying to spew.

          • trixiewoobeans

            Umm, maybe he “read a book” on creation, and it’s just as valid as your “book” on evolution. Talk about spew!

          • marylandman

            Equating science to a 2000+ year old book written by men. No wonder Republicans are the “stupid party.”

          • trixiewoobeans

            Wow! Color me SMACKED DOWN! Not! How much of science has been refuted, overturned, reversed, etc. etc.? I’m not against science, but don’t make it your god. It’s too fallible. And honestly, you don’t seem to know much about either.

          • marylandman

            You said the Bible was “just as valid” as scientific study. I guess you support forced marriage between rapists and their victims? Slavery is also justified in the Bible. I could go on listing the terrible actions permitted by the holy book but I’d rather not waste my time. Science is not my “god” and I’m not sure why you would assume that. But I’m pretty sure that science proves the world is older than 6000 years so I can’t understand how you think the creation fairy tale in the Bible is “just as valid” as science. It’s you who doesn’t know much about god or science.

          • trixiewoobeans

            Why isn’t it valid? There’s some rock solid, scientific truths in the Bible that science didn’t catch up to for thousands of years. Whizzah whuzzah on forced marriage? DUDE! Read before you judge! You haven’t got a clue what you’re talking about and it’s sticking out all over you. Don’t regurgitate MORSELS of what you’ve heard others say. Do your homework before you start something you can’t finish!

          • http://twitter.com/thetugboatphil TugboatPhil

            Thanks for the suggestion, but I don’t like fairy tales any more than you do.

        • marylandman

          You clearly didn’t finish elementary school. If that’s what you think evolution is, no wonder you’d rather believe the world was populated (incestuously) by one man who formed a woman from his rib and talked to snakes.

          • Hiraghm

            I don’t know about the forming a woman from his rib, but any reporter who’s interviewed a member of the Obama administration has talked to snakes…

          • http://twitter.com/thetugboatphil TugboatPhil

            You just assumed how I think the world was populated. That just makes an ass of “u”, not “me.” As to the version you mentioned, the man didn’t form anyone from his rib. But if he did, how is that different from geneticists today using DNA and existing body parts to clone and make new skin and organs? Do you not believe that those things are going on right now?

            It’s clear that you finished elementary school, but did you learn anything or just repeat what the teacher told you?

          • marylandman

            It’s wildly different because of the scientific advances made in the past 6000 years. Go ahead though, continue to justify your bigotry with the Bible. It’s been done as long as the Bible has been around. Racism and slavery were once Biblically justified but I’m guessing that doesn’t bother you much.

          • trixiewoobeans

            WILDLY different!??? “Scientific advances made in the past 6000 years” LOL! Are you for reals?!!

          • http://twitter.com/thetugboatphil TugboatPhil

            His students never question what he tells them.

          • trixiewoobeans

            And he clearly never questioned anything, either, except what he was told to question…by teacher.

          • http://twitter.com/thetugboatphil TugboatPhil

            Again, YOU brought up the Biblical version. And yet again, you offer no explanation of your own. I have not once claimed to be using the Bible for a reference.

            I guess bigotry is a two way street. Hater.

          • Hiraghm

            And the justification for modern slavery to the state that you progressives are pushing on us?

          • Margie8

            That’s rich coming from someone who is here attacking someone. What justifies YOUR bigotry? Personally, I am fine with gay marriage, but I am also fine with God, etc. and if someone chooses to believe. You libs are all the same, all about tolerance and love…as long as someone believes in YOUR truth.

          • Christoph DeHaven

            You do know that the anti-slavery movement was begun and sustained by Christians who based their opposition to slavery on the Bible, don’t you?

          • marylandman

            Revisionist history lol

          • Christoph DeHaven

            I’m curious what you think evolution is. Also, I don’t know either you or your antagonist, but your use of ad hominem attacks is breathtaking.

        • E Quilibrate

          Tug, people like marylandman don’t have the
          capacity for rational thought. I think she may
          be a long lost sibling of Elizabeth Perkins. Know
          what I mean?

          • trixiewoobeans

            Guys, guys. Remember the saying, “Arguing with a liberal is like playing chess with a pigeon. It knocks over the pieces, poops on the board, then struts around all victorious.”

          • E Quilibrate

            Trixie, It’s curious that your pigeon sounds, to a remarkable degree, like that guy occupying the whie house.

          • trixiewoobeans

            Hmm, shall I issue a disclaimer? You know, “all characters in this thread are a creation of the writer, and was not intended in any way to portray actual people….and so forth and so on?”

          • Margie8

            LOL, never heard that before!

          • $35038462

            So funny, laughed out loud. Writing that down…

          • marylandman

            Rational thought? That’s exactly what evolution is. Idiot.

          • trixiewoobeans

            Then why haven’t you evolved to employ that?

      • Hiraghm

        Sounds like a perfect comparison to progressive philosophy. Secular beliefs include that gov’t can and should run individual people’s lives, Obama’s the messiah, humans are a threat to the planet, you can force and direct innovation, organic compounds are unnatural (I’m amused at all the self-proclaimed “rationalists”, alleged lovers of science, who go ape in opposition to genetically modified foodstuffs), guns drive you insane, windmills and solar panels can replace hydrocarbon energy sources, that the wind is renewable and that sunlight is renewable (when the sun goes red dwarf, I guess they expect it to reincarnate itself) but that petroleum, nuclear, and coal are not, that localized temporary weather variations constitute a change to the entire climate of the planet, that a sexual desire for members of the same sex is equivalent to a desire for the opposite sex, but NOT equivalent to a desire for animals, children, or inanimate objects,,, I could go on and on with the endless drivel of doublethink that progressives embrace daily…

        • marylandman

          You are incredibly, willfully ignorant. I have neither the time nor the desire to correct all of your looney, absurd assertions, but I’ll knock down a few. Firstly, your entire argument is one big straw man. Liberals don’t want government running individuals’ lives, that’s conservatives. The religious right has invaded personal liberty more than liberals ever have. Secondly, how in the world can you compare homosexuality to bestiality or pedophilia? You must have a brain the size of a pea. You really have to be an absolute moron if you can’t see the difference. Homosexuality is between two consenting adults, whereas bestiality and pedophilia are not. Idiot. How stupid do you actually have to be to not understand that? The answer is very, very stupid. You have to be very, very, very stupid to compare homosexuality to bestiality or pedophilia. There is an obvious distinction that you fail to see, because you’re of very low intelligence. Lastly, my point remains true that secularism and religion are not equal. You tell yourself they’re equal to justify your belief in a 2000 year old fictional book written by men full of absurd stories about rape and murder.

          • Hiraghm

            It ain’t conservatives pushing Obamacare, it ain’t conservatives pushing seat belts, it ain’t conservatives limiting the size of our big gulps, it ain’t conservatives regulating the crap out of every aspect of our lives, it ain’t conservatives giving millions of tax dollars to promote failed energy philosophies, it ain’t conservatives trying to guide the economy or “progress” society in a given direction. That’s all your progressives’.

            Please explain how a sexual APPETITE for the same sex, the opposite sex, animals, children or inanimate objects is DIFFERENT? You can’t, without resorting to that old “consenting” canard. Consent has NOTHING to do with appetites. A Hershey bar doesn’t need to consent for me to desire eating one.

            Heterosexual romance and sexual desire has an *evolutionary* precedent, explanation, and function. No other sexual desire does. Please explain the evolutionary logic behind homosexual desires?

            Your issue with the “2000 year old fictional book” is that it’s 2000 years old, since you progressives seem to have no problem with AlGore’s dystopian fantasy, “Earth in the Balance”.

            Edited to add Bloomberg reference.

          • marylandman

            Well, nothing is going to open your eyes. If you can’t see the difference between homosexuality and bestiality or pedophilia, you are a moron. Plain and simple. You are an idiot. I don’t know how else to put it.

            Also, are you still rehashing that Romney lie about Obama’s energy investments? Something like 2 of the 35 companies went bankrupt but it’s easier for you conservatives to believe that every company went under. That’s why you bring up Solyndra over and over again instead of the vast majority of companies that are succeeding. That’s the conservative way though, disregard all facts and follow the narrative you most agree with.

          • Hiraghm

            I notice you don’t try to define a difference, yourself.

            And you keep ignoring what I’m saying… the APPETITE… the DESIRE.. both of which occur in the human brain, and therefore do not require consent of others to exist.

            I have a sexual appetite for human females. Ms Perkins does NOT have to give consent for me to *feel* that appetite. She only has to give consent for me to fulfill it using her body. So your consenting argument is BS.

            Explain the evolutionary logic behind a sexual *appetite* for the same sex, for animals, for children or for inanimate objects? Keep it simple; explain the evolutionary logic behind a sexual appetite for the same sex? The function of the sex organs, of sexual attraction and romance, is reproduction, much as the function of the stomach, intestines and hunger is to nourish the body. In fact, the attempt is being made today to suggest that there’s something wrong with people who want to eat tasty food instead of nutritious; we’ve been “brainwashed” or “conditioned”. But any such suggestion about homosexuality is viciously attacked rather than discussed.

            Calling me a “moron” or an “idiot” doesn’t negate my assertion, nor does it answer my question.

            I don’t bring up just Solyndra; virtually every “alternative” energy company the gov’t has invested taxpayer money in has gone belly-up. The number is closer to 50 than to 2.

            I don’t follow Romney; a Republican progressive is almost as bad as a Democrat progressive.

            The ones the gov’t hasn’t invested taxpayer money in I don’t care about, because, since the gov’t isn’t investing our money in them, they’re not being used to promote the ridiculous agenda and shape our society’s future without the consent of the People.

            “You are an idiot. I don’t know how else to put it.”

            Translation: I cannot refute your arguments.

          • Jeff McCabe

            hmm. a little better. Still going with the “you’re wrong because you’re stupid” argument, but expanded to “2 of 35 companies went bankrupt….vast majority are succeeding” That’s almost a supporting argument. See, if you had provided examples of some of those 33 companies, like how much government money they received, and how much of a profit margin they currently enjoy, and a reason why they needed the government money to turn a profit would have actually been a supporting point.

          • ozconservative

            Staying afloat by means of taxpayer dollars is not “succeeding”.

          • 3seven77

            Please provide a list of the “green energy” companies that are “succeeding”. Include data to show what their products are and how much profit each has made compared to how much taxpayer $$$ were given to them to subsidize their operations.

            Marylandman, Here is a list of **some** of the “green energy companies” that have FAILED after being given hundreds of millions of TAXPAYER dollars by Barack Obama. (news flash! There is more than 2…)

            List Of Failed Green Energy Jobs & Companies – By Obama

            Update: 7/19/12: The Amonix Solar: FAIL! – manufacturing plant in North Las Vegas, subsidized by more than $20 million in federal tax credits and grants given by Obama Administration, has closed its 214,000 square foot facility a year after it opened.

            Solar Trust of America: FAIL! – Filed Bankruptcy in Oakland, CA, April 3, 2012

            Bright Source: FAIL! – Bright Source warned Obama’s Energy Department officials in March 2011 that delays in approving a $1.6 billion U.S. loan guarantee would embarrass the White House and force the solar-energy company to close. Bright Source lost billions of dollars but is getting more money to keep trying.

            Solyndra: FAIL! – Obama gave $500,000,000 (that’s a HALF BILLION!) in taxpayer money to Solyndra who shut its doors and laid off 1100 workers in August 2011 after billions in losses due to failure to make a solar product that works! Barack Obama was not vetted before being elected President and neither was Solyndra before Mr. Obama threw that taxpayer money down the drain of unproven technology.

            LSP Energy: FAIL! – LSP Energy LP filed bankruptcy protection and a sale of its assets in Feb 2012

            Energy Conversion Devices: FAIL! – On February 14, 2012 Energy Conversion Devices, Inc. and its subsidiaries filed for bankruptcy

            Abound Solar: FAIL! – Abound Solar received a $400 million loan guarantee from Barack Obama then announced in June, 2012 that it would file for bankruptcy.

            SunPower: FAIL! – SunPower stopped producing solar cells in 2011 at near bankruptcy then restructured with the help of, get this, oil giant TOTAL, Inc. who owns 60% stake in SunPower. Irony? The company is still struggling.

            Beacon Power: FAIL! – Beacon Power Corp filed for bankruptcy protection in October, 2011 just a year after Obama approved a $43 million Government loan guarantee. They remain barely in business, still struggling to make energy that makes sense or that works at all.

            Ecotality: FAIL! – ECOtality, a San Francisco green-tech company that never earned any money and remains on the verge of bankruptcy after receiving roughly $115 million in two loan guarantees from President Obama.

            A123 Solar: FAIL! – A123 Solar received $279 million from taxpayers thanks to President Obama’s Department of Energy loan guarantees even after the Solyndra bankruptcy and is getting another $500M from Obama after a loss of $400M.

            UniSolar: FAIL! – Uni-Solar filed for Ch 11 bankruptcy in June 20, 2012 after laying off hundreds of workers. UniSolar received even more Obama money after showing now progress, no profits and is still failing… yet they still remain in business with Obama’s help.

            Azure Dynamics: FAIL! – Azure Dynamics filed for bankruptcy in June, 2012 wasting millions in Obama “Stimulus” money and received abatement on taxes owed and several tax credits. Azure Dynamics LLC filed for bankruptcy protection in Canada and the US. Azure laid off 120 of its 160 employees in Oak Park; Boston; Vancouver, British Columbia; and the UK.

            Evergreen Solar: FAIL! – Evergreen Solar received $527 Million in Taxpayer money from Obama and filed bankruptcy in late 2011. Evergreen, which closed its taxpayer-supported Devens factory in March, 2011 cut more than 1800 jobs. Evergreen’s $450 million factory, turned out to be a colossal “waste” of taxpayer money.

            Ener1: FAIL! Ener1 Inc. received a $118 million U.S. Energy
            Department grant from President Obama to make electric-car batteries but filed for bankruptcy protection January 2012 after defaulting on bond debt.

            Guess what? There are more, but Marylandman I think you should do the research yourself. You might learn something. Google can be your friend. Just do a search on “Obama green energy failures”

          • Jeff McCabe

            tip- Arguing a point, yet providing as the only supporting evidence of said point is that “you’re stupid” is ineffective.

          • http://twitter.com/thetugboatphil TugboatPhil

            But he thinks if he does it often enough that he’ll get a different result.

        • E Quilibrate

          Your “go ape” reference is hilarious, that type
          subtle humor just makes my day. The rest of
          your post is extraordinary as well, thanks.

        • Christian Orpinell

          Right here, “that a sexual desire for members of the same sex is equivalent to a desire for the opposite sex, but NOT equivalent to a desire for animals, children, or inanimate objects…” I 101% agree with this statement and I feel it’s one (out of the hundreds of reasons) same sex marriage makes absolutely no sense. Lol. I was in an ultra liberal classroom of mine and my teacher asked, “How many of you agree with same-sex marriage” and everyone including herself raised her hand and then she asked, “How many of you disagree with same-sex marriage.” Myself and one other person were the only people who did that and boy was I swimming in my sweat. — While keeping my calm I debated my reasoning as to why I disagree with same-sex marriage and I used what you just said in your statement as one of the arguments. However, I knew I hand to stand up against that secular mentality, that if you don’t agree with same-sex marriage or attraction you’re a bigot, and deplorable monster that hates letting others “practice” their “rights”, etc. I found two things sad that day, one students called herself a devout Christian and said she supports same-sex marriage (makes no sense whatsoever), and everyone that rose their hands in support was only doing so because they did not want to debate about the issue, or get themselves nervous as hell.

          Honestly this is an issue about ‘positive tolerance’. As a Christian, I feel absolutes such as right(s) and wrong(s) could have only been provided by a spiritual and all knowing creator. God.

          Same-sex supporters often lash out at others that disagree with their thinking as intolerant, hating individuals for. Simply for disagreeing with their ideology. They even go as far as to say that you 1. hate them 2. are limiting their freedoms and 3. you’re forcing your religious ideology upon them. The problem with their assertions is that with 1. If someone else disagrees with you or disagrees with your thinking it does not mean that you hate them. A loving father and mother can easily continue to show love towards a son that has been convicted of a felon. Although, the parents disagree with what he did, and may even try to discipline him in some form or way it still does not mean they hate him. In fact it’s rather love that they would be showing. 2. Freedoms are subjective. A serial killer may feel it should be his freedom to kill and rape as many people as possible. However, it falls back into the question if freedoms are relative to absolutes such as right(s) and wrong(s). Secular freedom on the other hand would pay no attention towards what is considered right and wrong. For example, a perfectly healthy person in a definite context threw a baby out the window; does that man deserve death because he caused the death of another? What he caused was death, so should death be caused on him? Secular laws (or society) on the other hand would say he was a mentally handicapped victim of society that was unable to have a healthy level of self-esteem thus he should be given “a slap on the hand” and some government aid. Now, the problem with 3. is how has marriage been defined? Marriage as a word with a meaning has been detonated from references pertaining to that of the Bible, or you could say that of Christian values. What I find preposterous is that once you change the core meaning of a definition, might as well change the meaning of anything else that bothers, offends, or contradicts your feelings. Thus we have homosexuals, and lesbians, trans, etc. etc. trying to get “married” to gain “rights” that they already have. Again, these same individuals are clueless to the fact marriage is / and has been denoted through the bible.

          If these individuals seek to gain their own version of same-sex “marriage” then call if something diabolically different in every way possible so the contrast / difference may be known. Perhaps, same-sex craver’s license, partnership?

          I asked some atheists earlier on yahoo answers about the existence of absolutes. Right(s) and wrong(s). I didn’t get a good answer.

          • WWMD

            Ill give you an answer. You are a complete idiot. Do not have the same rights as you speak -liar. You are only thinking of small tiny state based rights. Not federal. The case bringing DOMA to Supreme Court, a lesbian whose partner for over 50 FIFTY years, died. They had been good citizens worked hard paid taxes like everyone else. But upon death the surviving spouse were handed a 340,000. Say that number to yourself 340,000 dollar inheritance tax that had they been recognized by the federal government as married, would be 0
            So I guess epic fail on your point of got all the same rights.
            Your other points about animals etc are just too stupid to even try to argue with you.

          • Christian Orpinell

            So you entrust the government to provide for returns on anything? Really? You do realize that affects everyone, and not just a poor lesbian 50 year old?

            “Say that number to yourself 340,000 dollar inheritance tax that had they been recognized by the federal government as married, would be 0”

            That’s too bad. Marriage needs a concrete definition. Once the definition of marriage that has been derived from not only the bible and the meaning that it’s applied between a male and female is removed; you bring up a plethora of arguments that are perfectly legitimate. Once marriage is re-defined. What’s stopping some crazies from re-defining marriage between an animal or an in-animate object.

            If you find my points too stupid to ‘argue’ with me, that’s fine. Let’s debate perhaps?

        • Worship Dancer

          wonder if the libturds know he signed the monsanto act to ALLOW, nay force, genetically altered food on the American public?

    • Vennoye

      I would only change your word “religion” to the words “faith in God”. Religious systems have failed many..God has not!! Too many people do not separate one from the other. Agree with you on everything else.

      “It is impossible to enslave, mentally or socially, a bible-reading people. The principles of the bible are the groundwork of human freedom.” ~~ Horace

    • rinodino

      ” I cant imagine being so invested in a politician that i run to defend him no matter the charge” …..Yeah you are right …. Sort of like Reagan

      • Hiraghm

        or JFK… or Clinton (both of whom “legitimized” adultery in the White House because they were Democrats).

        • Well Done

          One day we’ll learn just what sort of behavior in the White House Obama “legitimizes”.

    • Margie8

      I can’t wait to be allowed to follow more people, you, Mr. Carroll, will be on the top of my list. Fantastic response!

    • http://www.facebook.com/brett.mcmicken Brett McMicken
    • Kevin Oakes

      Steve, I fear that personality cult will lead to a lifetime POTUS BH Obama.

    • WWMD

      What did that Scott carol do when he tweeted about honoring the true messiah Jesus and what did he do?. He tweeted a pic of him and a kid. It’s all about him talk about a messiah complex. A caring person would have tweeted a pic of The Lord Jesus Can you believe someone would be so selfish?

      Oh wait , !, it’s his PROFILE PIC THAT HE CHOSE. JUST LIKE BARACK OBAMA’s Wow. Wow.

  • Dandy1

    Not a smart pr move for someone whose new series starts next week. Lost me and you haven’t even aired yet.

    • Breitbarts Corpse

      Oh, I bet she’s really worried about losing the church pancake breakfast crowd.

      • $18912735

        True, the “church pancake breakfast crowd” (seriously!?! WTF is that?) wasn’t going to watch her show anyway. In fact, nobody was.

        • Hiraghm

          mmmm… pancakes…

          Waffles are not pancakes! No matter how you try to legitimize them as being pancakes, they are NOT PANCAKES. You can eat them if you want to, in the privacy of your own Denny’s or IHOP or Perkins, but don’t expect me to equate waffles with pancakes! And don’t call me a hater just because I prefer pancakes. Some of my best meals have included waffles…

          • Hiraghm

            Sorry… I was just overcome with a sudden bout of silly…

          • nc

            …or hunger…

          • TexSizzle

            It looks to me like you were following Rush Limbaugh’s example of demonstrating absurdity by being absurd.

    • trixiewoobeans

      She’s culling the herd.

  • June Clinkenbeard

    You know that whole “white guilt” thing liberals love to talk about? (See Toure) Here’s their poster child. Doesn’t she have any friends or family with firing synapses?

    • TocksNedlog

      Their synapses all got fired, and now they’re on the dole.

      • Grumpa Grumpus

        Laughed so much I needed my breather (i.e., oxygen) mask….
        Thank you!

        • TocksNedlog


      • E Quilibrate


    • Miss Clairee

      I’m WHITE…..I DON’T feel guilty! I’m WHITE…..I DON’T feel guilty………I’m WHITE…I DON’T feel guilty! I’m WHITE…I DON’T feel guilty!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

      • Miss Clairee

        And I’m STRAIGHT….don’t feel guilty….I’m STRAIGHT……don’t feel guilty……I’m STRAIGHT…..don’t feel guilty………

        • Hiraghm

          I’ve got so many real things to feel guilty over, things I’ve actually done wrong, I don’t have room for any emotional baggage over being a heterosexual white male.

        • http://www.facebook.com/luke.givens.963 Luke Givens

          That’s nice, but do you have a case of Tourette’s syndrome though causing you to shout randomly? It’s ok, I don’t judge, but treatment is available for that.

          • trixiewoobeans

            She wasn’t shouting randomly, she was shouting something specific to the thread. Geez, bone up on your Tourette’s.

    • E Quilibrate

      Aren’t synapses unique to a brain? If that is true the
      answer is clear.

  • Chip

    Perkins is just jaded cuz she’s never won an award from her “peers.”

    • Miss Clairee

      Heh! Most of her peers are idiots too!

      • Hiraghm

        which is what makes them her peers…

  • TocksNedlog

    So beautiful . . . so dumb.

  • RblDiver

    I also heard a quote, can’t remember the full bit, but he had a soccer (I believe) team visit the WH a few days ago and in his remarks said something to the effect of “Now, call it coincidence, but shortly after I talked to them they started winning all their games.”

  • nc

    For all those who claim “how does my SSM affect you?” I give you exhibit A: Any criticism, no matter how mild, is viewed as bigoted and stupid, no open discussion allowed.

    • Breitbarts Corpse

      That’s because it usually is. Enjoy this paradigm shift.

      • TheOriginalDonald

        Enjoy the Decline and Fall of American Civilization. I’ll bring the popcorn

    • Hiraghm

      Considering how the leftists like to trot out “for the Chiiiiiildren” over every issue, I wish people would respond to that question with, “it’s not about me; it negatively affects the chiiiiildren”.

      No-fault, easy divorce. Single moms. Loss of shame in having children out of wedlock. Feminism (the brand that made it a requirement for ‘equal’ women to join the workforce rather than raise their kids). These are all assaults on the traditional family, and just because we have thus far survived them doesn’t make SSM “okay”.

      • Conservative Ohioan

        Jim Williams – you are a genius! This has been my argument against same sex marriage for years. Liberals have mewled about how awful marriage is, because they’ve accommodated the above tactics to ruin it. Then they scream “let’s screw it up even more!”

    • http://twitter.com/thetugboatphil TugboatPhil

      Something that occurred to me this morning that would also result from this is that just like the civil rights movement spawned the likes of Jackson and Sharpton, we’ll have a bunch of homosexual hucksters spouting 40 years and more of victimization and congressional affirmative action.

      • nc

        That’s just the beginning of the “unintended consequences” part.

    • WWMD

      They problem is not criticism. You can say what ever you want I can criticize the ignorance here like thinking Obama tweets a picture of himself when he is honoring a dead person etc that it is just his profile pic as millions have and it doesn’t change but you people twist it into something it’s not as per usual

      Problem is when you turn that criticism into laws directly affecting gay families causing harm with undue unfair financial hardship among other things Learn the difference

      • Christian Orpinell

        “Problem is when you turn that criticism into laws directly affecting gay families causing harm with undue unfair financial hardship among other things Learn the difference”

        Really? How was marriage first defined? Is it a secular term? Where did the denotation of marriage derive from?

  • oneword

    Can Perkins really be that dumb? Obama has sex with himself everynight

    • http://www.facebook.com/joseph.a.white.16 Joseph A White

      That would be a step up from Moochelle.

  • http://www.facebook.com/kenneth.r.riggs Kenneth Ray Riggs

    Who is Elizabeth Perkins and why would anyone care?

  • notenoughtime

    All I know is this issue has found its way into the everyday conversations of my high school and college student. If they state they prefer traditional marriage based on their values, they are degraded, demeaned and called every name in the book. It doesn’t matter if they don’t care who people choose to have a relationship with, they prefer the traditional form of marriage be kept intact. Pres. O’s fingerprints are all over this issue because it serves his purpose to divide and conquer. There is no healthy debate on this subject and it is almost like a modern day persecution for those who would like to stay true to their religion. Another lightweight Hollywood celeb pointing fingers and sermonizing. My advice is to keep their day jobs and leave the heavy lifting to those who do not have the means to ride out these very unsettling, turbulent times. Could we get back to fixing the economy and getting people back to work. This give Pres. O something to do and get us off the social issues bullet train.

    • Breitbarts Corpse

      Hey, I have an idea: since your kids prefer traditional marriages, why don’t they just marry someone of the opposite sex and worry less about other people’s relationships?

      • Hiraghm

        Hey, here’s a thought, how about other people stop trying to have their mental/emotional illnesses redefined into a 3rd sex? How about other people just go get therapy for their misdirected sexual appetites, and stop trying to force others to validate their aberrant appetites as normal and healthy?

      • nc

        Maybe you missed the “degraded, demeaned and called every name in the book” part.

  • JR48

    Who is this person and why does anyone care?

    • $18912735

      She’s FAAAAAAAAAAAAAAMOOOOOOOUUUUUUUUUUUUSSSSSSSSS! Bow to her brilliant and insightful musings, peasant!

      • JR48

        LOL I still don’t know who she is.

  • kate_middleton

    So strange. Shouldn’t Elizabeth Perkins have better things to do than look through tweets directed at Obama (or OFA, ahem)? I mean clearly not, but this is so strange.

    • $18912735

      Hollywood people seem to spend an inordinate amount of time on twitter. As Narcissus used to stare at his image in a pond, today we have twitter for all the narcissists to gaze at their own brilliance.

      • trixiewoobeans

        LOL! They’re the “stars” of their own, personal movies! They can be “on” 24/7! We can all bathe in the sewer of their stream-of-consciousness!

  • aliwilcox

    The hatred that simmers in all liberals, and I do mean all: BO, Hillary, etc, all evolved this year. They are lauded for their “growth.” Bill O’Reilly says he’s okay with same sex marriage, and the raptors mock, deride and criticize. There will never be peaceful coexistance between right and left.

    • $23639361

      Exactly!! It’s not possible in any way. That’s why I absolutely DESPISE those FLUKE-ING “coexist” bumper stickers.

  • bicentennialguy

    Elizabeth Perkins…Elizabeth Perkins…sounds familiar…..must have been someone at some point in time. Really, I think her biggest claim to fame was portraying the lovely and talented Wilma Flintstone in a movie once.

    • Hiraghm

      Didn’t she found a chain of restaurants?

      • trixiewoobeans

        Yes! Perkins’ Deep-Fried Lemmings for Libs!

        • Red Fred

          So relieved to read the Prez had the “brightest bulb” to run interference for him. Isn’t she like 70 years old now??

  • Princess_Jen

    Awhile back I made the song “Cult of Personality” my ring tone. Well done whatever thst supposed “starlets” name wss pro ing my choice in ironic humor correct.

  • Hiraghm

    “She must have been really upset when that guy who opposed same-sex marriage was elected in 2008.”

    Since when is she on a first-name basis with the pretender in chief? I bet she never referred to President Bush as “George”, or even “W”.

  • almarquardt

    Funny how he “Stands for millions” when it comes to gay marriage and abortion rights, but not the millions of gun owners and those who believe every part of the Constitution shall not be infringed.

    • Hiraghm

      He can defend invented rights and protections, but if he even tries to defend any part of the Constitution, sooner or later Article 2 section 1 clause 5 will come slap him in the face.

      • trixiewoobeans

        I’d pay to see THAT!

  • $27789750

    Who onGod’s green earth is Elzabeth Perkins? Is there big Greyhound somewhere tht drives the streets picking up these women and dropping them at some TV studio where there are dropped into a movie or TV show unannounced and become celebrities , a new one every other day or so?. These keep turning up like confetti thrown into the air.

  • Gallatin

    Well what do you know elizabeth perkins does believe in Santa Clause, in the form of baracka clause.

  • http://marezilla.com/ Zilla of the Resistance

    I never heard of Elizabeth Perkins until now, and I still don’t know who the heck she is aside from an Obamazombie Twitter troll (or “twoll”).

  • Guest

    “done “engaging” for ur amusement”. Is that code for “you are not a Hollywood person so not worthy of my time”?

  • trixiewoobeans

    I don’t understand why people are clamoring to be “legally” joined in an institution that now has over a 50% FAIL rate. Would you go to a stockbroker and say, “I wish to invest ALL my money in your riskiest, poorest-performing, guaranteed- to- fail over 50% of the time stocks!” Oh hells no! So why the outcry? You know who’s driving this, don’t you? The legal community. Lawyers are rubbing their hands together with glee, waiting for the divorce fall-out and all that lovely, lovely money to be made representing divorcing same/sex couples. It’s almost like it was planned! Who’d of thunk it?

  • stellatruman

    If there is such thing as a smart entertainer, it would be defined as one who knows when to keep their political opinions to themselves

  • David LJ LaycockSr

    Ah yes. Obama the Trauma needs no help He has his disbarred wife who loves extortion advising him and you see how that is working out.

  • http://Twitter.com/jkerrysforehead John Kerry’s Forehead

    Who is she? Damn, Twitter must be handing out check marks to anyone.

  • Jacqueline Gilmore Estrella

    @elizabethperkins …….what is it with all these old washed up actors trying to get “face time” on twitter? Don’t they realize that in their heyday, they were valued for the entertainment they provided ONLY. Now, by opening their pie holes and pretending to have an intellectual cause, they turn their public off big time. STFU and slink back into obscurity.

    • Rick Bowser

      Lizzy must have been slumming with Nancy Grahn.

  • Ray O.

    Who the hell is Elizabeth Perkins?

  • WWMD

    I now truly know that ever wrote this “by twitchy staff” I certainly see why you wouldn’t want your name on it. Not to mention the intellectual level of those who believe it and pass it on. It’s kinda like when you have the kids in school that are smart, do their work, question, read, get good grades there are these kids who have to come in and try to debase them, call beat them up, bully them, lie about them. I wonder sometimes what happened to those types of kids. No I know they are fans of sites like this thinking they are getting the “real” facts.

    I have a twitter acct. I have a profile pic that I chose. Many other people have their chosen pic as profile pic. I have not seen a public official or celebrity or any well known figure over all that does not use a regular face shot as the profile pic. But this beyond STUPID article says:

    “When astronaut Neil Armstrong died, @BarackObama marked the occasion with a photo of Barack Obama. The late Daniel Inouye was remembered with a photo of Barack Obama. The White House marked the Rosa Parks anniversary with a photo of Barack Obama. Pearl Harbor? Barack Obama.”

    Seriously? You people truly are idiotic ignorant imbeciles. The “pic” referred to is his profile pic that comes with ANYONE’S tweet. He is not “sending out a pic of himself ”

    • TexSizzle

      The picture Obama sent out of himself on the bus Rosa parks rode was his profile pic? You are what you called us, “idiotic ignorant imbecile”. Bless your heart.

      • WWMD

        I’m talking about the tweets posted here a link in tweet is different and you go visit memorials why isn’t it honoring by being in that spor

  • Anderson

    Perkins is a bitch isn’t she?

  • bo1921

    She’s best known as Wilma, Fred Flintstone’s wife.

  • Joe Squid

    Who the hell is Elizabeth Perkins???????? She build a better mousetrap or something??? :-/

  • Garth Haycock

    She’s a has-been B or even C rated actress.

  • Morneau_for_4

    The movie “Big” with Tom Hanks was the pinnacle of her career.

  • James Cushman

    She was in the movie Big and not much else.

  • Grumpa Grumpus

    Hey! Watch it! ;~)}
    In the 1940s through the 1960s, B & C-rated actors/actresses had talent!

    She’s a “wish-I-could-be-wanna-be” who can only pretend to the title of “actor”[sic] b/c she pays dues to the guild!

  • Garth Haycock

    You make a fair point. One of those B-rated actors became one of the greatest Presidents in this country’s history.

    As to Ms. Perkins, she was born in the 60s and made movies in the 80s, so technically, there’s a difference. (That’s my story and I’m sticking to it.)