Blair’s credit is non-existent
26 June 2007 by Naomi
(To fully enjoy the image, click here. Absolutely NSFW! I repeat: NSFW viewing!)
Did you know that Tony Blair is converting to Catholicism? It’s been mentioned on the “webs-n-tubes” for the past week, but I paid no attention. Until I read this:
Andrew Grice, the political editor of The Independent is reporting that Blair has waited until leaving office to avoid possible legal issues:
Although Britain has never had a Catholic prime minister, the church has said there would be no constitutional bar to Mr Blair joining while he was still in office. But some lawyers believe the 1829 Emancipation Act, which granted civil rights to Roman Catholics, may still prevent a Catholic from becoming Prime Minister. It says that no Catholic adviser to the monarch can hold civil or military office.
Fast forward to this item at Crooks&Liars:
Apparently, Blair met with Pope Benedict on Saturday as his last official act of office and was given a “frank” dressing down by the anti-war Germanic Pope. The Vatican said there had been a ‘frank exchange of views.‘ If Tony Blair was looking towards the Pontiff and the Catholic Church for the absolution of his sins regarding the Iraq War, he was not to find it in Vatican City. Blair, trying to put some spiritual distance between himself and his policies, had no such luck. Not unlike Michael Corleone in Godfather III, Blair ‘keeps trying to get out and they keep pulling him back in’.
Vatican sources said the Pope was unmoved in his view that Blair had been wrong over Iraq. Ouch! Don’t worry, there’s still time and a few religions left. Can anyone say “circumcision?”
WTF? Catholics in England have a lot in common with atheists in the US? Wow!
27 June 2007, on 12:14 am
lol, TOG gets moderated for so-called porn, but this pic is ok??
I thought gord forgave all….
27 June 2007, on 1:30 am
Revenant, I’m not sure how you can suggest a political cartoon is equivalent to the graphic description of an unsourced report of an alleged homosexual encounter involving a Congressman about which research failed to turn up any allegations. innuendoes or smears.
If you can convince me that most of the world believes Blair’s head HASN’T been up Bush’s ass for the last five years, I’ll take it down.
Moreover, if the majority of commenters (and even lurkers who care to comment) feel it qualifies as a pornographic image, GifS will remove it.
If, however, you are just taking a jab at me for a series of events that you feel I alone am responsible for, say so. But you’ll gain little satisfaction beyond that. Stardust, et.al., has declared that a closed issue. Have your say, if you feel you need to – but there will be no rehashing of either my actions or TOG’s.
FYI, most of GifS images are “edgy”, in case you hadn’t noticed…
27 June 2007, on 1:45 am
Stardust, et.al., has declared that a closed issue.
Yes, let that whole unfortunate and separate set of circumstances concerning TOG RIP. The horse is long dead. We’ve all moved on (including TOG), our commenters should, too. Thanks.
27 June 2007, on 2:08 am
How did you get a picture of my ass?!
27 June 2007, on 2:15 am
AUM, I admit that the sight of nicely rounded male buttocks are a joy to behold! If they are, indeed, yours – lucky, lucky you…
27 June 2007, on 7:49 am
Sorry, but I didn’t get to take part in those other discussions. And since TOG’s comments were never revealed, I can only speculate.
Yes I know they’re edgy, which is why I included the “lol”, and the question.
27 June 2007, on 10:35 am
Um, please don’t take down the picture… please…please…
27 June 2007, on 11:31 am
Just to be clear, I do not advocate taking down the picture. I like a nice ass as much as the next person, but let’s have a female ass the next time
27 June 2007, on 11:48 am
Hmmm, Naomi…Would it be possible to add a tattoo of a designated ass kissing spot…you know…for those diehard(-on), Chimpy worshiping, “Fart-based” Fundies to plant their quivering lips on?
Perhaps, somewhere on the extreme right of the left cheek…so whilst kissing their ‘Gord designated’, messianic, “Delusional in Chief”, their praises would echo up into the chasm? All the while, of course, getting a whiff of the putrid smell of the waste products from his…shall we say…somewhat dietary, “Decider” addiction. The smell would of course be a mix; compounded with the smell from all those other worldwide religious, warmongering, zealot fuckheads; intent on turning this planet into one, humongous, Armageddon-like cesspool of delusional excrement.
I dunno…just wondering.
27 June 2007, on 1:58 pm
We lived in a goddamned patriarchy. Naked females are everywhere. We need some balance.
27 June 2007, on 2:02 pm
Let’s leave the pretty image (shiny objects?) for a while and discuss the outrageous disconnect that in the UK a catholic can’t be an advisor to QEII but an atheist can. At least, it may be possible. It doesn’t seem to have been proscribed as the catholics are.
Yet, in the US, catholics are more than accepted – in fact, they hold great power. And the atheists are trashed…
Why?
27 June 2007, on 2:03 pm
Ramen, Marcy!
27 June 2007, on 3:20 pm
Where are these naked females?? Why wasn’t I informed??
Is this like using Her instead of He in literature? Two wrongs make a right, is it? Why not use “one” as a gender neutral pronoun?
27 June 2007, on 3:22 pm
Naomi, is it Catholics who hold great power, or xians in general? I thought the last and first cath president was JFK, not sure though.
27 June 2007, on 3:56 pm
Catholics in England have a lot in common with atheists in the US?
‘Ray! Now if we can just chip away at the other stuff, like their church’s opposition to sex ed, contraception, and abortion choice…
I wonder how soon Blair will start turning anti-war – or will he, conversion notwithstanding? Can he at this point in the game wean himself off the Shrub?
27 June 2007, on 3:58 pm
Sorry to double-post, but I wonder what infuriates theists more, naked female or naked male bits?
27 June 2007, on 10:57 pm
Rev, in terms of media access (and plain ol’ media sucking-up) US cat’licks have a leg up on US’ atheists. And there’s a shitload of them in both houses of Congress! Contrast that with how we were treated on Paula Zahn’s show and the absence of atheists in Congress. Where is our Bill-Donahue-loudmouth?
And, Rev, any time you want to take over the “spam-trashing” duties, let Stardust and I know. I can’t speak for Stardust, but sometimes I want to go take a scalding shower after just reading the titles of some of them. So, yeah, Rev, there are naked ladies of all ages/sizes/colors/nationalities/”alternative methods” all over the ‘net. Have at them! I posted a very lovely bum!
Eve, I have been under the impression that Blair was already a cat’lick (this goes back to the early days of the Iraqal Debacle; perhaps his wife, Cheri/Cherie/Cherry/whatever is the one…).
29 June 2007, on 10:12 am
The Human Rights Act 1998, so hated by frothing-mouthed Daily Mail readers, would make it legal for a Roman Catholic to be Prime Minister (any law saying otherwise would conflict with Article 9 of the ECHR, which the UK act incorporates into UK law). However, Bliar was first elected in 1997, before the Act became law. I believe there is also a 1951 law which would have prevented such religious discrimination, however, I don’t have a reference to hand.
At any rate, the Church of England was originally organised along Catholic principles (just basically with sed -i -e ’s/Pope/King of England/g’ *) when Henry VIII originally set it up. It was only much later that it became more “protestant” and began rejecting articles of Catholic dogma. (cf. Deut. 14:21 “….. Thou shalt not seethe a kid in his mother’s milk”, which refers to a specific sacrificial ritual practised by a competing religion; this has been interpreted by some as requiring separate utensils for the preparation of meat and dairy products, and it’s not even OK to eat meat from one type of animal with milk from a different type of animal e.g. Chicken Kiev) . Even in spite of all this, the CoE is still about the least protestant of all the reformed churches, though.
3 July 2007, on 9:46 pm
Thanks, AJS.