I've long had a bunch of pictures that I've wanted to get rid of, and so today, it was either write something about Scumbama or delete pics – which would you choose?

That's right, I decided to write about Scumbama! Specifically, I was trying to decide what to call The Most Dangerous Man Alive.

That's still up in the air, so I've decided that "Scumbama" will do for now.

So now that I was done talking about our Pig-President, I turned to deleting pictures, and before long, I was screaming as loud as I do whenever I see Scumbama's face in my family room!

Why? Well, let me ask you, how long has Vox been around? And don't you think they've had enough time to make things easily workable – or to at least provide a detailed help file that guides you through?

So try to delete a picture if you don't know how to do it goin' in. Here's what the instructions from Voxdamnit say:

The Organize page makes it easy to add photos and manage all of your items in one place. To get there, hover over My Vox in the on any Vox page and click Organize in the drop down menu that appears.

See, the Organize page makes it easy.


Btw, the exclamation mark above was to indicate "near stroke level" agitation.

But it tells you how to get there you think… just hover over MY VOX "in the on any Vox page!"

Got that it's IN THE ON!


So I went to EVERY VOX PAGE!

That's right, every one!

And I didn't see so stinking "MY VOX" on any one of 'em?

I even turned off all my blocking mechanisms in case I'd "MY VOX" off my screen long ago, and…. NOTHING?

No "My Vox," so nothing to hover "IN THE ON" on!

Thus… no ORGANIZE!


Thanks, Vox, no wonder you're PROBAMA? It's NO PROBLEMA!

Read and post comments | Send to a friend


About tedwest

A longtime veteran of comedy and political forums, I decided that I needed a more restful venue because... well... I finally hate everybody. Except my wife that is... and my ex-wife.. and... no, that's about it. I lead about as simple a life as one can, preferring activities that include anything that doesn't involve going out and seeing YOU! And I particularly enjoy what I call "Get the Bitch" movies on Lifetime. You know the ones where the intended victim finally does something so incredibly stupid that she forfeits her right to live, and from that moment on you're rooting for the stalker. Of course, it rarely works out the way you want, but when it does, the feeling you get is... well, there's nothing else like it, other than, maybe, eating chocolate chip cookies. Oh, and I'm proudly anti-wildlife, both foreign and domestic, and anti-environment - especially foreign environments. I think Howard Stern put it best when he said, "If fifty percent of the population died tomorrow, I can live with that." And I feel the same about the other fifty percent, so together, we've pretty much got it all covered.
This entry was posted in Uncategorized and tagged , , . Bookmark the permalink.

31 Responses to Voxbamadamnit

  1. Snowy says:

    Welcome back. Click on You, Library, Photos. The delete facility is activated when you select the photo you want to delete.

  2. TedWest says:

    Thanks and much obliged, Mr. S. I've added you back as a friend. I'd like to keep it that way if possible? πŸ˜‰ What do you think are the odds?

  3. Snowy says:

    What do you think are the odds? Remote, at best, Ted. ;o)

  4. TedWest says:

    OK, well can we at least agree that Vox' directions were garbage?

  5. Snowy says:

    I guess there has to be a first for everything. We agree…

  6. TedWest says:

    What a great start! Now can we agree that Obama's garbage?

  7. Snowy says:

    Well, that didn't last long, did it.

  8. TedWest says:

    Well, I admit I was setting you up, but that was all in fun.
    Unfortunately, that ends right now, because it has turned very serious, and I'm sure you're as concerned as I am that Obama has become, at best, divisive and thuggish, and at worst, Hitlerian. or at least Chavezian and Ahmadinejadian.
    The attack on Fox News alone is enough to make any thinking person shudder, I'm sure you'll agree. And conversely, anyone who can justify such attacks by the most powerful man in the world, is not, fair and balanced himself, wouldn't you concur?
    One of the things I hated about Bush was his silence in the face of relentless, vicious attacks, and I was furious that the administration continued to give interviews to people who were out to destroy it – even though I was one of them and yet still miffed that no one granted me an interview.
    But it would have been quite another thing if that administration had actually orchestrated an effort to damage a news organization, even if it were the New York Times, by soliciting cooperation of the various other news organizations.
    So I have no doubt you're as dismayed as I am, but of course, "dismayed" is just where it begins, and this is just one issue among the many things Obama has done that should concern rational people everywhere, as I'm sure you'd agree?.

  9. TedWest says:

    I was just employing a tactic espoused by Rahm Emanuel which I felt confident Snowy would appreciate – "You never want a serious crisis to go to waste"…
    And in anticipation, yes, my failure to delete had become a serious crisis to which only Snowy came to my aid, I might add, further confirming my opinion of conservatives. If I prick you, do you not bleed…?

  10. Darcy says:

    I read this before anyone else commented and went to look for a solution and I was as baffled as you were. I think it's just great that this "crisis" has brought you and Snowy back together again. At least for now.

  11. TedWest says:

    Well, the ball''s in his mouth now, so we'll see.

  12. Snowy says:

    The attack on Fox News alone is enough to make any thinking person shudder, I'm sure you'll agree. And conversely, anyone who can justify such attacks by the most powerful man in the world, is not, fair and balanced himself, wouldn't you concur?Sigh.. I suppose I'll reluctantly have to take the bait, but on one condition. I'll state my case. No doubt you'll state yours. But that will be it. I don't care to waste any further time in the inevitable slanging match that will result. I only came here to help you out with a problem, not to attempt the impossible. And it would be a shame to end such a beautiful friendship so soon… Fox News have had it coming for long, long time. There is nothing "fair and balanced" about its reporting. Free speech isn't a one way street. If Fox News are to have the right to criticise the President, then surely the President has the right to criticise Fox News for its biased reporting. And it is biased reporting, designed to direct people's thoughts away from the substance to the trivial. That is a deliberate ploy by the wealthy who back Fox News, and they deserve to be called for it. Can they really deny that they are an arm of the Republican Party? Of course not, and Obama has every right to say so, just as any other American has. So far as I know, the President doesn't lose his rights as an American just because he is the President.Health care reform is a good example. Obama is attempting long overdue reform, yet he has had no support from Fox News or the Republicans. Instead, he has been subjected to scurrilous attacks by Republicans about his birth certificate, his religion, and so-called "death squads" that Fox News has done nothing to counter. That the present shambles of a healthcare system results in the deaths of some 45,000 Americans a year and yet attracts no comment from either Fox News or the Republicans is an utter disgrace. Republican comments on health care range from the laughable outright denial by Glenn Beck that there is any problem, to others who are honest enough to admit that there is a problem but that government shouldn't be left to fix it. If government don't do it, then who will? Fox News? I don't think so. The health insurers? I don't think so. The health insurers have had adequate time to get their act together, but still retain the right to sentence people to death and/or bankrupt them by denying cover for pre-existing conditions or dropping cover. Say what you like about Obama, but at least he is trying to end such unconscionable behaviour, where Fox News and Republicans have nothing to say about it. Health insurance profits (and political donations) are sacrosanct, so it would seem.It seems to me, Ted, that you would be better served getting behind Obama in his efforts to bring about a better health care system than moaning about the rights of Fox News who are better placed to defend their rights than hundreds of millions of others. Like the Americans bankrupted by health care bills, for instance. I understand they constitute fifty percent of all bankruptcies. I haven't heard Fox News or Republicans go in to bat for them. Ever. No, far better to organise Tea Parties, encourage birthers, deathers, and any other conspiracy theory dreamed up by the rabid right. Anything to distract the people's attention from the serious issues, which just might threaten those same sacrosanct profits. Like health care reform. Maybe you'd care to do a post on what to do about that some time, Ted? Seems to me that would be far more productive than just calling Obama garbage, or any other silly insult that comes to mind. That really achieves nothing, does it. Which is just as Fox News and their wealthy Republican backers who are screwing you want it.

  13. TedWest says:

    "Fox News have had it coming for long, long time. There is nothing "fair and balanced" about its reporting"
    I stopped there in order to keep your dream of a friendship intact. Whatever Fox is, there is no news service more fair and balanced than Fox. And for what it's worth, Fox isn't very conservative to me.

  14. Catalina says:

    "If Fox News are to have the right to criticise the President, then
    surely the President has the right to criticise Fox News for its biased
    reporting."- It just makes Obama look like a bigger ass (as if that is possible).

  15. TedWest says:

    I knew I wouldn't be able to avoid this πŸ˜‰
    If criticizing were all Bobo was doing, that would be unpresidential, but tolerable. However, That isn't even close to what he's doing. He's a two-bit thug just like Chavez.. But that actually increases his worht since he wasn't worth a plugged nickel before.

  16. Snowy says:

    Hmm, I thought my response warranted something better than that, Ted. After all, you did invite me to comment. Oh well, I'll be off now, my newly found friend. Go well. And mind the Obama bogeyman. Sorry, that really wasn't called for, was it. Old habits die hard…Oh, and BTW you'll be interested to know, I'm sure, that we do have something else in common in that we've both blocked that conservative of note, ken. Ah, now there's a fine example of a knowledgeable Fox News viewer.

  17. TedWest says:

    I said that I stopped reading out of deference to you. I see that you spent considerable time on your reply, and I will certainly read it if you desire, but based on your outrageous comment about Fox vis-a-vis the tactics of the Thug-in-Chief which you seem to have conveniently dismissed, I thought it better to stop right there. It occurs to me that since you only watch liberal media, you may not be fully aware of exactly what Bobo and his other clowns are doing.
    And considering the quote the lady provided Fox ' reporting is only biased if it's exaggerated or untrue. Did you provide an example of the bias?
    I sincerely appreciate your assistance regarding deleting pictures, and I do want to make every effort to treat you decently, so if you wish me to read your comment, I will make every effort then to be considerate.
    Re: Ken, you have no idea what your comment means to me, since he is truly the slime of the Earth, and yet I see him included in the neighborhood of many conservatives here. In fact, I was recently dropped from someone's neighborhood, and when I looked, there was K-K-Ken. Amazing and doubly insulting to me, so that person must be doubly pleased..
    So let's do this. I've long known you are an all around nice guy, and while I'm not, I do respect you and wish you the best. I will be happy to discuss anything you'd like, and I will endeavor to stop any discussion before I feel the need to insult you personally πŸ˜‰
    And again, your wish in this thread is my command.

  18. Snowy says:

    No, I don't think so, Ted, although I do appreciate your kind remarks re myself. You and I see things from completely different perspectives, and past experience shows that never the twain shall meet. We can bang on here for hours, but would accomplish nothing, except ulcers. At my age, I'm very conscious of using the remaining years, hours, minutes I have in useful pursuits. Sorry, but I don't see that arguing with you here is a useful pursuit. No disrespect intended. I'll drop in occasionally, and maybe even have a little snipe now and again, just to keep you on your mettle, but that's all
    I do think you chickened out on my Fox post though, as I thought I made some good points that you would enjoy demolishing. Yes, I know it was aiming below the belt given our previous discussions on health care. What else could you expect from liberal slime like me? ;o)
    Regarding Ken, you may be interested to know that there is a Vox group devoted to bloggers who have blocked him. I'll send you an invitation to join, but be warned, you'll be in the company of a lot of slimy liberals like me.
    Ok, I'm off again. I'll leave you to your Glenn Beck ruminations. You think he's a hero. I think he's a dickhead. Says it all really, doesn't it.

  19. TedWest says:

    I'm going to call that "Snowmo bile!"
    And I have to decide whether you've successfully baited me into reading your comments after all. In the interim, can a conscious decision in the affirmative actually be considered takig the bait?
    I don;t recall if you said how old you are, but I wonder how old you think I am?
    How could an acknowledgment that our arguing would accomplish nothing result in me taking offense? especially when I've known that since I thought you were a girl?
    And speaking of girls, I actually think there's and absolutely lovely one who will be rather pleased that you and I are on speaking terms.
    And speaking of speaking, I wonder if you know that no matter how angry I may appear with respect to yourself, I would have extended you the same courtesy you did me above if I had an answer to your particular problem?
    Which of course I don't other than to advise you to stay on your meds!?!
    Now about Ken. I was quite amused that you actually have a group devoted to the dirtbag, but I can't join it because to do so would be to accord him status he doesn't deserve since I was his whole raison d'etre here. But do extend the members my warmest regards regardless of their political leanings.
    Re: health care… you do realize that I was demanding reform a decade ago, I believe. It's the direction the reform is going that is beyond troubling, and I blame conservatives for that since I was pummeled for even suggesting reform those many years ago.
    Now I can't promise that I will never take issue with you, but unless you bring an issue to me, it's unlikely we will suffer through the episodes of animosity we enjoyed so much in the past. That's because I have no desire to argue with anyone anymore. I've found that people on the right can be every bit as stupid as those on the left as this Percolator guy is currently demonstrating in a later thread here,
    To engage them is to legitimize them, and frankly, present company excluded, most of them are a mere level or two above Ken, primarily because they are semi-literate and he can't spell "I."
    Which reminds me of a Star Trek episode…

  20. Snowy says:

    Ok, I'll join the age pissing contest. I'm 70. Now top that. I'll hazard a guess and say you're a very immature 55.
    I agree that the health reform process leaves much to be desired, but politics is the art of the possible. It is no easy task to bring about change in an existing system. Machiavelli had something to say about that 5-600 years ago. Now there's a real conservative for you.
    And it ought to be remembered that there is nothing more difficult to take in hand, more perilous to conduct, or more uncertain in its success, than to take the lead in the introduction of a new order of things. Because the innovator has for enemies all those who have done well under the old conditions, and lukewarm defenders in those who may do well under the new. This coolness arises partly from fear of the opponents, who have the laws on their side, and partly from the incredulity of men, who do not readily believe in new things until they have had a long experience of them. Thus it happens that whenever those who are hostile have the opportunity to attack, they do it like partisans, whilst the others defend lukewarmly, in such wise that the prince is endangered along with them.

  21. TedWest says:

    Jesus Christ, let's bring it back to reality, shall we? It's precisely the "new order" that's the problem, because what's wrong with the old one was all a liberal creation in the first place, and easily remedied by competition across state lines, medical savings accounts, and tort reform. All of that, relatively cost free and more importantly, free of government control, most especially, "death panels."
    On the other hand, there is no demonstrable advantage to a public option, and the government control it would add and the lack of the ability to appeal is an affront to human dignity… I added that last part to elevate the practical "here and now" solutions to the ethereal realm you attempted to achieve.
    I'll accept the immaturity label if you'll accept the idea that a person your age may not be thinking as clearly as he once did?

  22. TedWest says:

    OK, I've waded through your original diatribe because I was in a good mood and I figured, who needs that? And sure enough, it was every bit as general and ill-informed as I'd feared.
    Yet I was pleased to learn that my above reply had already addressed the request contained in the your last paragraph, and I will be only too happy to go point by point now if your heart is up to it? I feel certain your mind isn't, but this would be for the benefit of the reader, not you and/or me.
    In the meantime, some general observations:
    If you believe Fox is in bed with Republicans, do you believe that the rest of the media is in bed with Obama (shudder)?
    Whenever I read a liberal's take on something I'm always shocked by what they appear not to know and by what they are willing to overlook if they do.
    I think I made a similar offer to you before – to go point by point, and you ran away using the excuse that I'd be too insulting or something similar?
    I'm always amused and distressed at once when a liberal provides links to "bolster" their claims. Said links are always lacking in themselves and usually wacko to boot. Such are the ones you provided.
    Nevertheless, I will renew my offer to go point by point with you using as a blueprint the "good points that you would enjoy demolishing" or you can simply make individual assertions and I'll demolish each one, holding your hand as I go. I assure you however, that it will bring me no enjoyment because in the end, when you lie amidst the rubble, you will continue to believe exactly what you do now.
    In fact, I'll make you a standing offer: whenever you have a point you want "clarified, ie: demolished, just bring it to me and I'll help you get through the madness.
    And may I ask, why is it that people on your side never read or listen to people and things that make real, logical sense?
    And rather than rant about, for example, Fox news, why don't you bring your specific objection to me and we'll sort it out? Because this may surprise you… I don't agree with many things I hear even on Fox – which I listen to and you don't.
    Which reminds me, you do understand the difference between general and specific, don't you? Specific requires an actual example.
    Oh… I'm sorry, one last thing… what one thing has Obama done that you take strong issue with?

  23. Snowy says:

    and easily remedied by competition across state lines, medical savings accounts, and tort reform.Well, if it was so easily remedied, why isn't it done? And just who is responsible for implementing this easy remedy, if it isn't government? Fox News? Glenn Beck? Health Insurance companies? Tooth fairy? Public options work right around the world. There is no reason why it can't work in the U.S. if the will is there. And if you're going to talk death panel bullshit, then I'm out of here, as it is clear just who is losing their grip on reality, and it ain't me. But to be truthful, I don't really give a rat's arse what you finish up with. I'm happy to give support to those Vox friends who suffer under the present system. For those of you who just want to whine about Obama and who never lifted a finger to bring about worthwhile change, then you can stew in your own juice so far as I am concerned. Go listen to Glenn Beck. He seems to think you've got the best health care system in the world already, although that's not what he was saying when he worked for CNN.

  24. Snowy says:

    Nah, I'm not into long boring point by point discussions with you, Ted. As I said above, I don't really care what you think. And if you're just going to ignore reputable links without providing any of your own, then it just becomes a babble of words, none of which count for anything. I've been down that path so many times that I no longer care to waste my time in such a manner. Obama may or may not achieve worthwhile change. If he fails, as so many of you hope, then it is you who are the losers. I do have to wonder at the mentality of those who think this way. But, it's your problem. I'll leave you to it. Adios.

  25. TedWest says:

    And there it is, exactly what I expected from you… all charges and generalities, no specifics. I'm convinced that liberals don't really have any knowledge of details, just as you seem ignorant of why there's no real competition in our healthcare. Of course, you, yourself, don't have to, in which case then, what am I entertaining your nonsense?
    Public options do not work – in Canada, Lesser Britain, Germany… and it doesn't even take much brainpower to understand why, but rather than describe it, I'll let you take a shot?
    I also note that you have ignored both my invitation and my specific questions. Are you afraid? Because I believe you have no confidence both in what you know and in your ability to argue your position… like all liberals, you just want what you want, reason be damned.
    This looked just stunning on you though:
    "Well, if it was so easily remedied, why isn't it done?"
    Why don't you consult with your think tank, see what they say, and get back to me?
    I'd be remiss if I didn't say this though: while I fully expected that you'd duck out, I am very disappointed in your lack of finesse. I always say that no liberal position can stand up to scrutiny, and you have just issued a blanket confirmation.

  26. Snowy says:

    Public options do not work – in Canada, Lesser Britain, Germany… and
    it doesn't even take much brainpower to understand why, but rather than
    describe it, I'll let you take a shot?Don't they? Care to provide some evidence of this, and I don't mean the isolated whines of a few malcontents? For someone who talks a lot about my supposed generalities, that sure takes some beating. You also carefully avoid mentioning my country. Just as well, as you would quite possibly be lynched if you made such a demonstrably stupid statement in my country, and with good reason. I don't notice any of those countries you mention clamouring for a U.S. style health care system. The fact that they all deliver universal health care at half the cost of the U.S. system must tell you something. But hey, Glenn Beck says you have the best health care system in the world, so it must be so. Lambs to the slaughter…You see, Ted, people in the U.S. have been brainwashed by the likes of Fox News and the Republican Party into believing that the interests of big business must coincide with the interests of the populace at large, So it is that certain catch cries such as "less government" are designed to prevent the very change that the country is screaming out for. That certain vested interests such as health insurance companies pay big bucks to lobbyists and Fox News is no coincidence. They are concerned with their interests, not yours, and you fall for it every time you repeat the inanities of your hero, Glenn Beck.You're not doing very well, are you. You dismiss my links as irrelevant, yet provide none of your own. You haven't said how health care change is to come about. You haven't demonstrated how Fox News is "fair and balanced". In fact, you haven't really said anything of substance at all. And you even lost the age pissing contest by being a no-show. All in all, a most unsatisfactory performance.

  27. Catalina says:

    You are right – this is just another attack on our rights.

  28. TedWest says:

    OK, you're done. I'm going to answer you but unless you have facts instead of charges after that, I'm not going to let you post here.
    I didn't mention Australia because I don't know anything about Australia. I suspect there are looming problems if your system is anything like LB or Canada, but that's just a guess, a semi-educated one based on those people here who want Medicare extended to everyone.
    Medicare is an absolute failure, but if it did work for a moment in time, even then then it had greatly exceeded it's cost projections, and because it's a government entity, there is no appeal from whatever the government decides.
    In Britain, there are shocking stories. They have a death panel called Liverpool care, they have healthcare workers who won't answer calls because it's break time, they have people dying because the state has determined they are ready to die when they may not be, and they have people deprived of treatment because it has been decided that it's not cost efficient.
    In Canada, you have to wait six months for some tests and operations that your pet can get on a couple days' notice, and there's also the problem with rising costs and panel decisions. And then there's Natasha Richardson. Because there were no hospitals nearby that were equipped to deal with her, she died when she might very well have been saved. More importantly, Canada has the USA. When treatment is denied there, those who can, come here.
    We won't have that. And a public option will eventually become the only option. That's not an opinion. The government has unlimited resources. If its program loses money, subsidize it. And one simply can not trust liberals to be good stewards.
    As for your last paragraph, it makes me wonder if you have Alzheimer's. I told you how simple it would be to change health care here for the better. I would add that it should be illegal for business to provide health coverage since that skews competition and discriminates.
    And I don't have to provide examples of how Fox is fair and balanced, it's up to you to provide something besides the charge that it's not. But you can't because you only know what you've read from idiots in Liberaland, and even when they provide evidence that in itself is usually idiotic as were the links you provided.
    I noticed your Moore post. It's beyond idiotic. There were a couple of points with which I'd agree, but the rest were insane as is Moore… and probably then… you.
    Now I urge you to go to the Wall Street Journal's site and subscribe to James Taranto. Read a week's worth of his column, Best of the Web, and then get back to me. If you choose not to do that, don't come back. Because not only have you blown any residual goodwill, you've made me regret I approved your original post.
    No liberal position is sustainable, and no liberal is rational. Prove me wrong or say so long, but in either case, do not post here again until at least next Thursday. Between you and Percolator, whom I think is also Australian, I've had all the stupidity I can tolerate for now.

  29. TedWest says:

    There's something I forgot to address, but before I do, I want to say that my comment that company provided health insurance should be illegal is just that – a comment… albeit a legitimate one, but it won't happen, and the same result could be accomplished simply by opening up competition across state lines.
    Now, regarding your idiotic remark that health care is twice as expensive here, and the idiotic link you provided…
    The headline says it all. Best or just most expensive? IDIOTIC!
    First, to have any possible chance of comparison, measurements among countries would have to be equal. But that's impossible. Not only does population makeup differ wildly, but so do the way such things as the way infant mortality is determined. Not to mention the fact that we could be both the best and most expensive. In fact, that would make more sense.
    But even if we accept the worst case scenario the headline suggests, it…
    A) Does not make the case for public health care
    B) Does not take into account differential factors that may not be be able to be reconciled.
    In short, the study is bogus, and since there is no free market in health care now, we do not know what would happen if the simple reforms I mentioned would be implemented – and liberals don't want to find out because this is all about consolidation and control – again as the lady suggests above.
    And finally, and perhaps the biggest thing I overlooked.. what the hell am I doing even talking to you, a foreigner, about all this?

  30. Snowy says:

    As for your last paragraph, it makes me wonder if you have Alzheimer's.So long, Ted. Personal insults of this nature disqualify you from taking up any more of my time.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s