Click to enlarge and to get rid of those censor boxes.
h/t to Joe and Andy. I did the racially- and gender-inclusive version of the meme, of course, because I can't do anything without a smug sense of liberal superiority.
Share
Like what you read? Subscribe to The Bilerico Project by Email.
Want others to read it too? Use the buttons and links here to share this entry with others. (Move your cursor over a button or link to learn more about it.)
22 Comments
« impACT Florida video | Home | Kenneth Starr pretends like he understands self-restraint »
Andy did the right thing by providing a resource for the number one LGBT issue, Prop 8 protests, times, cities, ect. Thousands went there for information. The popularity is paying off.
Charles Merrill | January 8, 2009 8:11 AM
Reply to this comment
Charles, must you turn every little joke and game into a chance to be snide and insult others? Whatever made you so bitter?
And if you hate us as much as you contend you do, what makes you stick around? It certainly can't be all the Rachel Maddow pics. :)
Alex Blaze | January 8, 2009 11:20 AM
Reply to this comment
For the record, I clicked on Rachel Maddow first. I can't help it. I think she's adorable.:)
S Brian Walters | January 8, 2009 8:40 AM
Reply to this comment
She's totally hot!
Alex Blaze | January 8, 2009 11:21 AM
Reply to this comment
You guys ARE the best, the smartest, the most readable -- I don't care what the stupid poll says.
golikewater | January 8, 2009 9:15 AM
Reply to this comment
Why didn't you use Prince William's penis picture for this post?
I take a look at that gem every time I comment.
patrick | January 8, 2009 9:35 AM
Reply to this comment
LOL - I just want to know what I have to do to see the rest of #4. I've voted every day dammit. Don't I get a reward for that? :)
Bil Browning | January 8, 2009 9:51 AM
Reply to this comment
Actually, that one had a swimsuit. There is no nude version.
That's how devious I am. I don't even put up real naked pictures. :)
Alex Blaze | January 8, 2009 11:23 AM
Reply to this comment
I'm pretty sure that #3 is also wearing underwear. (Just guessing.) What about #1?
Man, when I do a sex post, I do it right. LMAO
Bil Browning | January 8, 2009 4:52 PM
Reply to this comment
#1 and #4 had underwear, and #3 was covering himself but didn't have any.
But I don't know if #2 had any underwear.
Alex Blaze | January 8, 2009 5:41 PM
Reply to this comment
Frankly I think that like almost all kinds of "Vote for the Best This or That" things, whether on the Internet or otherwise, really should be labeled "Let's See Who Can Be The Most Innovative and Effective In Getting People to Click On Their Spot and Not The Other Person's"
"Best" is a measure of quality. Bilerico has it in spades, hearts, clubs, diamonds, not to mention consistent high quality writing and commentary. Period.
Just like 50.1% of the electorate can't take away fundamental rights, not ending up at the top of the "overclicing finger" heap would have absolutely no relevance to the inherent worthiness of this site and its hard-working leaders.
(Now do I get a raise?)
Don Sherfick | January 8, 2009 10:48 AM
Reply to this comment
LOL. I'll talk to him about one of those 100% raises he gives out sometimes. ;)
Alex Blaze | January 8, 2009 11:24 AM
Reply to this comment
Okay, I admit that I am torn as to which person in the pics I would want to met.
I would want to met any of the boys for obvious reasons, but Rachel is RACHEL.
Michael Crawford | January 8, 2009 11:40 AM
Reply to this comment
What the HECK was the Rachel Maddow one supposed to be covering? A trach scar?
Andrew | January 8, 2009 11:50 AM
Reply to this comment
I think there is a song called: "Nuthin' from nothin' leaves nothin' ". Multiplying by zero produces the same results. Divide by zero, though, and the shit really flies. Maybe that technique would be more effective than fraudulent use of black rectangles. There's probably a law.
Don Sherfick | January 8, 2009 11:58 AM
Reply to this comment
And if there isn't one, there ought to be one.
I wonder what it says about me that I actually know "Nothing from Nothing"....
Alex Blaze | January 8, 2009 12:12 PM
Reply to this comment
The song apparently postdates an older saying. The song was written in 1974 by Billy Preston. What I looked up started writing it one night in the dressing room of an Atlanta nightclub where he was performing. He wanted to write a song based on the saying, "Nothing from nothing leaves nothing."
Bruce Fisher, who was Preston's songwriting partner (he co-wrote his previous American chart topper, "Will It Go Round in Circles"), added a second verse.
The B-side of the single was another song Preston wrote with Fisher: "You Are So Beautiful," which was later a hit for Joe Cocker.
They decided to market it as "Best Song of 1974", but they needed a marketing tool. So they put up pictures of naked and semi-naked men and women with little black rectangles hiding parts that in 1974 were perhaps a little more tolerated than James Dobson would think proper, and then when people got curious they saw it was really an Amway promotion. It was immoral then, and in a immutable theology it is immoral now.
Sorry to be a detractor, and an unpaid one at that, but since the comments on this thread otherwise seem to be going in a non-substantive direction, who am I to stand in the way of progress?
Don Sherfick | January 8, 2009 12:32 PM
Reply to this comment
Actually I did click on Rachel's pic and come here for the lesbian writers who so far are better than you arrogant gay guys from Indiana. Although Lane and Matt Comer are great. I think she is great as I was interviewed on the Rachel Maddow Radio show last month. I wasn't attacking your "joke" which seemed like sour grapes to me, but the layout of Towleroad and JoeMyGod is a good example for blogs to follow. The graphics are great, and the black backgrounds of both Joe and Towleroad show up the ads much better than on a white background. This, according to the late Jack Nichols, a friend of mine who produced GayToday for badpuppy.com.
Charles Merrill | January 8, 2009 12:15 PM
Reply to this comment
I thought it was pretty obviously a joke with the Rachel Maddow pic up there. That was probably too much nuance for a certain segment of our readership, I know, but I thought that most people would get it.
Oh Charles, why can't you just admit the *ahem* real reason you come around here? All your excuses fall apart - Lane (Hudson, I'm assuming) doesn't blog here. Matt Comer's great, but he writes more on other websites, so you can't be visiting us just for him.
It's gotta be the Hoosier styles.
Alex Blaze | January 8, 2009 12:45 PM
Reply to this comment
Real reason ? I know Patricia Nell Warren and enjoy her articles. She is a great writer.
Charles Merrill | January 8, 2009 2:52 PM
Reply to this comment
As usual, Alex, you're ahead of the curve on all of us!!!
Well done.
Brynn Craffey | January 8, 2009 3:55 PM
Reply to this comment
Just as long as he doesn't go out and straighten the curve for us.
diddlygrl | January 9, 2009 4:23 PM
Reply to this comment