"Barack Obama is a Powerful Speaker — And so is My Bose Bass Amp"

"The words 'change' and 'Jesus' are being tossed around in this election more than Lindsay Lohan was by those three Italian dudes last New Year’s Eve. I’m getting burned out hearing both the word change and the name Jesus, and I like them both."

"Obama Smoked the Ganja"

"Barack outed himself as being a former Lucy in the Sky with Diamonds member of his high school bong brigade. He put the high in high school. BO’s mea culpa immediately accomplished a few things: It solidified Snoop Dogg’s, Willie Nelson’s and Montel’s votes in the primaries, and it also sent some of my conservative compadres into a five alarm hissy fit."

"Obama Wants Your Evangelical Mama’s Vote"

"Barack Obama is to Christianity what Michael Jackson is to heterosexuality. He might be one, but he’s not the poster child for the cause. You know, when I watch Obama and the other overtly ideological southpaw’s queue up to play the Christ card, it takes me back to Kerry in ’04 when he tried to convince gun owners and hunters that he’s a Nimrod."

Just the kind of places that you hang out!

"White trash" & "bozos" -- Is using such denigrating language "childish"?

"an IQ lower than room temperature" -- I seem to recall that you've used that one before. (With your vast past experience, you might want to add a comment at Nitpick$'s post "Dog Manure Rules?" But not pictures again, PLEASE. )

"Raising the level of discourse" again? It's so refreshing that you are above using "personal attacks"!

The slime's oozing!!!!!

_______________________________

When the eagles are silent, THE PARROTS begin to jabber. ~ Winston Churchill

(A little switch on the back turns this pain in the **** off when you've had enough. If only life were so simple . . . . )

I didn't mean to say that dog manure "rules," a new age saying!
Just about the rules for handling dog manure.
When horses and horse and buggies were the mode of transportation, horse manure on the streets and roads required some horse manure rules, also.
I'm sure you have seen the little guy with a broom and a shovel following the elephants at a circus, haven't you? There has to be rules, concerning human nature!
Bags were used under the horses tail when going to town, not for the benefit of the town people, but to use in the bean rows at home!
The toilets in the very old castles in Europe had a small room off the "den" with the big fireplace, where a sit down toilet existed. The sewer line was a simple drop into the surrounding moat. That is why hardly anyone ever swam across it to get at the castle. The animals inside the castle compound required clean up crews--usually populated by evil-doers.
When the great herds of long horns and scrub cattle used to be driven between the Mexican border and the Kansas City rail-line, the stops at towns along the way posed somewhat of a clean-up problem, until folks like Matt Dillon started providing baby-sitters for the cows outside town while the drovers ate and, well, other things.
The sewer line from the library at Ephesus in Turkey, I noticed, had an angled chute into a running stream from the mountains to take the effluent down to, the what was then, a bay for ships. The bay must have stunk! I suppose St. Paul stayed away from that immediate area.
The bay is now full up and the ocean isn't in sight!
I just thought that I would beat others commenting about the unenforced dog manure rules in PTC! (That you mentioned!)

It kills me to know that you view me as white trash. Okay, I'm better now.

Although you are discounting the site as propaganda, you might want to take a look a Obama's voting record.

Here is Obama's voting record: The only thing Obama has ever run is the school newspaper, The Harvard Law Review, and the Dems now think he is ready to run America- How scary is that?

Seems the other Democrat leading your party, Hillary Rodham Clinton, (who, by the way, hasn't ever been in charge of anything either) did manage to show up to vote a bit more often.

By the way, I have been unable to find any factual inaccuracies on the site ... what lies, "half-truths and innuendos" did you find on the website Bas? Point them out for us won't you please?

________________________________________________________________________
Ground Zero - What Radical Islam Wants for You and Your Family

I get the picture. I have read some of this before and always thought Omba's mother a crackpot to say the least. He couldn't help being raised Muslim with a Mother like that. At 10, she ditches him and he is raised by his White grandparents in Hawaii, a mixture of all nationalities. Hardly an oppressed upbringing. Then he comes to the mainland and seems to lower himself into a racist black culture, that most blacks are doing their best to distance themselves from. It seems he is searching for the black power movement of the 60s.
This gives me the willies, in that all races should be trying to find more in common with each other than to go looking for the differences.
Being half and half, he of all people could have tried to help with that.

I listen to the debate the other night with an open mind. Like someone else posted, he didn't seem impassioned about anything, or was trying to hide his feelings to the point he seemed sterile.

I'm looking for the best candidate no matter the color, but he wasn't it. He seems to come from crackpots, and searches out crackpots. I just don't think he is sincere, but I do think he is ambitious. I want someone who will do the best for all, and right now this country desperately needs that. We have been gutted. Jobs going overseas. Our sons caught up in a war much like Vietnam and probably with the same results. The common worker has been sold out and needs help. If we don't elect someone this time based on who is best and forget the color, this country will be lost. Obama just doesn't have it, and the more I read about him, the more I don't know who he really is.

Obama favors abortion, socialized medicine, and Affirmative Action.

Obama sponsored a bill in the Illinois legislature requiring local police departments in Illinois to record the race of anyone stopped for questioning so that the data can be used to track the occurrence of racial profiling.

He opposes a $2,000 tax credit for retirement and has voted against private gun ownership, mandatory sentencing and the death penalty.

During his tenure as a legislator, he abstained from voting about an abortion parental notification bill and on legislation that would keep pornographic video stores and strip clubs from within 1,000 feet of schools and churches.

He has also voted against laws requiring students to complete suspensions before being transferred to other school districts.

He abstained from legislation requiring adult prosecution for students who fire guns on school grounds.

He opposed legislation making it a criminal offense for accused gang members to associate with known gang members.

There is a lot more..... don;t you want to know who Basmati is supporting for President Of the United States??

________________________________________________________________________
Ground Zero - What Radical Islam Wants for You and Your Family

So if a third grader brings a loaded gun to school and it goes off, he should be prosecuted as an adult?

Sounds like stupid legislation to me.

Not surprised you support such a law though.
_____________________________________________________
Wall Street Journal: FairTax,Flawed Tax
Best FairTax graph ever

He needs to go back to Iraq or Iran where he would be more comfortable.

He needs to take his muslim hate America message somewhere else.

You could make a much shorter version pointing out how far left Obama is and be more a LOT more persuasive. That site's content looks like it was created by some half-wits. The whole "he's really a militant Muslim" bit is asinine when they keep harping on how pro-gay rights and pro-choice he is.....these are NOT positions hardline Muslims ever take.

Some of their points are valid, but the site reads like one of those 9/11 conspiracy websites where a bunch of muddled opinions are somewhat linked to real events and then a lot of creative editing are thrown together in a mish-mash to appeal to the lowest common denominator of intelligence. Oh My God...he's a SMOKER!!!! Somehow I doubt that site's authors would have any problem with that if it were a Repub they were writing about. Let's see...any Repub politicians out there that smoke? It's a legal product, right?

No need to fear Obama because of some dimwitted website.....his voting record and rather clear positions on issues is enough without trying to bend the truth or reality.

I read a considerable amount of it myself and clicked many of the links. Quite a bit of the site appeared to have some validity to it but it resembles tremendously many of those 'Hate Bush' sites I researched in an attempt to discover whether there was any validity to the left's angst toward our sitting prez.

I'll probably not go back there, rather I'll probably maintain my current view of Obama as being another empty suited Gore - Lott - Westmoreland type politician..... big hat, no cattle.

________
In regards to Democrats, Republicans, gangs, and other scads of coterie Kool-Aide drinkers; Remember this..... Eagles Don't Flock

I could engage in your racist post above, but I'll decline...

Basically, according to Sniffles every "sad" one who feels Bush is doing a "great" job is white trash!

LOL at the swift boat comment - Didn't you hear - Romney is racist according to his religon and Huckabee only panders to the evangaleicals in this country.

Welcome to the Citizen blogs! I'm honored that your first post here is a personal attack on me! We're gonna have lots of fun, I can see!

One minor correction: while it is certainly true that there is a huge amount of overlap between white trash and the remain 25% hardcore Bush supporters, I'd like to point out that by no means are they synonymous. I can see where you'd get confused. But there are actually a few Bush supporters who don't actually hate/fear/disparage black folks, and believe it or not there is a growing number of white trash who actually don't approve of Bush anymore!

I agree with you about Huckabee pandering to evangelicals (or as you call them "evangaleicals") but I don't believe Romney is "a racist according to his religon(sic)"...his Mormon church disavowed their previous doctrine that Negro skin was God's punishment for sin way back in 1978! They've come a long way, baby!
_____________________________________________________
Wall Street Journal: FairTax,Flawed Tax
Best FairTax graph ever

can mention white folks in a hateful way, yet "Thebeaver" is the racist.

With your current pace, it won't be long until you get banned again, Bas. At least you aren't posting links to feces - that was an extremely good debate tactic!

You sure seem to know alot about the history of these bloggers, for being so new to the blogs themselves. What was your previous screen name and what were you banned for?

was Rock - I wasn't banned. I rarely, if ever post. I just encountered the same login issue that a few other folks have had. The venom that was spewed last night hit a nerve.

Perhaps it is as you say a smear site. My only question is this: What if the information is accurate and true.

These bozos have managed to string together every half-truth, innuendo, and outright lie they could find about Obama and put 'em all on one little nasty site.

If their research is accurate and true would you retract your typical nasty description of these "bozos", or does the truth not matter as long as the accused is running as a Democrat? Why do I suspect that if Obama were running as a Republican your agenda and attitude would be the same as the one you have toward any other Republican candidate.

Again Mr. Sniffles, it once again appears that to you the truth only matters if it benefits your political agenda.

Please prove me wrong.

________
In regards to Democrats, Republicans, gangs, and other scads of coterie Kool-Aide drinkers; Remember this..... Eagles Don't Flock

You know, Git Real, for a self-described "independent" you have a most unusual habit of immediately leaping to the defense of any criticism of the Republican party. Quite unusual behavior for an "independent", wouldn't you agree?

You also labor under the false assumption that I am somehow obligated to present both sides of an argument, a standard you somehow neglect to apply to any other poster on this blog, particularly Republicans. I find that most disconcerting.

Just to reiterate: I am a partisan Democrat. I make no apologies for that either. You can choose to attack me personally by referring to my opinions as "typically nasty" but I will not rise to the bait. As a good Christian, I will set the example for you by turning the other cheek!

I stand by my characterization of that site as a bigoted hate site. The whole aim of that site is to present Barack Obama in the worst light possible. Feel free to disagree, heck, feel free to defend that slimy site to the end of the Earth if it so moves ya. Isn't America great where we can have a difference of opinion?

Have a splendid evening, my "independent" friend!

you have a most unusual habit of immediately leaping to the defense of any criticism of the Republican party. Quite unusual behavior for an "independent", wouldn't you agree?

I disagree my friend. History has proved my disdain for many noted and worthless political hacks such as our own Westmoreland, Seabaugh, Perdue, Isakson, & countless others. I shred, without even opening the piles of Republican junk mail that I still receive after years of denouncing these clowns. However, at voting time I have to pull the lever for the least of the worst.... so don't assume anything.

I am somehow obligated to present both sides of an argument

I've never insinuated that. I'm only calling out your inconsistencies in holding your bad guys to the same standards that you expect the Republican bad guys to adhere to.

a standard you somehow neglect to apply to any other poster on this blog, particularly Republicans

You are full of crap. I have consistently gone for the throats of corrupt Republicans over the the time span I have blogged on this site. You know it too. You just fail in the ability to claim the same standard.

Just to reiterate: I am a partisan Democrat. I make no apologies for that either

No problem with me on that. I respect your faithfulness to your convictions. Like I've always said and have repeatedly pointed out. The bad guys are okay with you as long as they are your bad guys. That makes you no more honorable than our very own Westmoreland.

You can choose to attack me personally by referring to my opinions as "typically nasty"As a good Christian, I will set the example for you by turning the other cheek!

Thanks... I need all the charity I can get.

I stand by my characterization of that site as a bigoted hate site. The whole aim of that site is to present Barack Obama in the worst light possible.

Yeah...but if Obama was a Republican, you'd swear on that site as if it were the Gospel. Why of course the aim of that site is to cast Obama in the worst possible light. But, again my question was: If it's true would you change your opinion and support of him?

free to defend that slimy site to the end of the Earth

You know good and dern well that I wasn't defending it. I was just pointing out your "knee jerk" reaction (to use terminology you utilize and understand)reaction to the site. Anyone knows that you neither read it, researched it's assertions, or followed it's links to verify it's possible validity. It counters your agenda so you don't give a rip as to whether it is true or not.

Through all of this I have finally seen the light of salvation. For the forgiveness of all my sins, all I have to do is speak the name of the Democrat Party and I SHALL BE SAVED.

Have a splendid evening, my "independent" friend!

You have a wonderful evening too my friend. Remember... I love you in the name of the Democrat Party.

________
In regards to Democrats, Republicans, gangs, and other scads of coterie Kool-Aide drinkers; Remember this..... Eagles Don't Flock

I disagree my friend. History has proved my disdain for many noted and worthless political hacks such as our own Westmoreland, Seabaugh, Perdue, Isakson, & countless others. I shred, without even opening the piles of Republican junk mail that I still receive after years of denouncing these clowns. However, at voting time I have to pull the lever for the least of the worst.... so don't assume anything.

Do you realize what you are implying? If I'm understanding you correctly, you're claiming it's okay when YOU attack someone, but when *I* do it I'm somehow in the "wrong". Seems a trifle dishonest intellectually.

I've never insinuated that. I'm only calling out your inconsistencies in holding your bad guys to the same standards that you expect the Republican bad guys to adhere to.
Again, you expect me to criticize my own team? There's a dozen or more posters on this site who regularly bash Democrats for sins real and imagined, and *I* am somehow in the "wrong" for not doing this? Please explain why *I* am being singled out for such treatment when you've never held any Republican on this site to the same standard?

You are full of crap. I have consistently gone for the throats of corrupt Republicans over the the time span I have blogged on this site. You know it too. You just fail in the ability to claim the same standard.
Red Herring. You can and do criticize other politicians. I was talking about posters HERE, on this site. What we are talking about here is the fact that you continually single *me* out for criticism when I rebut a poster, but you rarely if ever do the same thing for anyone else. You are many things but I'm afraid "consistent" is not one of them.

No problem with me on that. I respect your faithfulness to your convictions. Like I've always said and have repeatedly pointed out. The bad guys are okay with you as long as they are your bad guys. That makes you no more honorable than our very own Westmoreland.
Cheap shot. You don't know what I think, and I'll thank your very much not to put words in my mouth or tell me how I think. That's not negotiable. I may not agree with some things Democrats say or do, but it's not up to you to determine whether or not I agree with them. Again, despite your claims to the contrary, I am under no obligation to criticize my own team, and for you to claim otherwise is just plain ludicrous.

Yeah...but if Obama was a Republican, you'd swear on that site as if it were the Gospel. Why of course the aim of that site is to cast Obama in the worst possible light. But, again my question was: If it's true would you change your opinion and support of him?
Another cheap shot! Again, don't put words in my mouth or tell me how I think. I'll keep repeating that until it sinks in. Look at it this way: You are attacking me for attacking an attack site. Whether or not that site is "true" is irrelevant....they've cherry-picked Obama's career and presented every negative thing they could find about him for the sole purpose of smearing him. Spare me your "concern" nattering about whether or not the crap they've presented is "true"...it's like those Martin Luther King hate sites that focus solely on King's shortcomings. Both types of sites are beneath contempt, in my opinion.

Bottom line: I'm going to criticize Enigma's sleazy buddies' website, and if you feel compelled to defend them, by all means be my guest. I thought you were better than that, though. Maybe you're less "independent" than you thought you were!

Do you realize what you are implying? If I'm understanding you correctly, you're claiming it's okay when YOU attack someone, but when *I* do it I'm somehow in the "wrong". Seems a trifle dishonest intellectually

Wrong again dude! Listen to what I am not implying, but rather to what I'm saying. I'm saying that you are inconsistent in holding bad guys on both sides of the fence to equal ethical standards. Read my lips: It's okay for Basmati's clan to participate in unethical or immoral activities, yet it's not okay for Enigma's clan to do the same. How shall I say this in Basmati speak.... does the term "blinders" help you out any?

Again, you expect me to criticize my own team?

Yup... If they're dirt bags, wrong, and sleazy then heck yeah I expect you to hold your guys accountable. It's the right thing to do, wouldn't you say?

There's a dozen or more posters on this site who regularly bash Democrats for sins real and imagined, and *I* am somehow in the "wrong" for not doing this? Please explain why *I* am being singled out for such treatment when you've never held any Republican on this site to the same standard?

Nice try buddy. Let's put it in your own words once again. To plagiarize your line of But, but, but, Clinton..., I'll change it to But, but, but, the other posters....

It seems your short term memory is fading a bit. The most recent of my attempts to expose Republican bad guys was very much documented when the Seabaughish Ramsey sleazed his way into office. Ask Nuk, Trax, and many others how fond of me they were as I busted my chops in exposing Ramsey and the developers schemes of propping the Republican Lawyer Empty Suited Ramsey up with over twenty five thousand dollars within hours of Dan Lakley's sudden death. I've got more examples but I really doubt that you would care to hear them.

Red Herring. You can and do criticize other politicians. I was talking about posters HERE, on this site. What we are talking about here is the fact that you continually single *me* out for criticism when I rebut a poster, but you rarely if ever do the same thing for anyone else. You are many things but I'm afraid "consistent" is not one of them.

Yup, I criticize politicians. I criticize them when they cross the line regardless of which side of the aisle they dwell. I've gone after other posters. Heck, I went after Munford regarding that idiotic fluff piece he wrote on Lawyer Ramsey and I even rattled the site god's cage on that one. I've gone after Giuliani supporters, Thompson, etc. etc. and even our sitting prez on many issues.

Why you? Because you're the nastiest, clichéd and partisan blogger on the site and you direct it personally to many other bloggers that dare cross your ideology. Me... I'm the knucklehead that likes to jump into a 'wrasslin match' when I see someone getting sand kicked into their eyes.

Cheap shot. You don't know what I think, and I'll thank your very much not to put words in my mouth or tell me how I think. That's not negotiable. I may not agree with some things Democrats say or do, but it's not up to you to determine whether or not I agree with them. Again, despite your claims to the contrary, I am under no obligation to criticize my own team, and for you to claim otherwise is just plain ludicrous.

Cheap shot? Perhaps. But I stand by my statement. No.... it's not up to me to determine whether you admit to the wrongs of your party. But, it is up to me whether I choose to prove out your inconsistencies in selectively exposing sleaze and corruption. Careful buddy, I'm not putting words in your mouth, nor am I telling you how to think. You've made it perfectly clear where you stand and as to how you selectively hold politicians and other posters accountable. I admit... we all have our prejudices, but yours are as clear as a hooded Klan member marching through Forsyth county. Now don't misinterpret what I just said.

You are attacking me for attacking an attack site. Whether or not that site is "true" is irrelevant....they've cherry-picked Obama's career and presented every negative thing they could find about him for the sole purpose of smearing him. Spare me your "concern" nattering about whether or not the crap they've presented is "true"...it's like those Martin Luther King hate sites that focus solely on King's shortcomings. Both types of sites are beneath contempt, in my opinion.

What do you mean "whether or not that site is true is irrelevant"? You mean to tell me that if it's true then those truth's are irrelevant? Are you nuts? Please tell me you didn't really mean to say that. How about all those "left-wing sites" that disparage Republicans and Bush constantly. Like the one's that bash Bush's military service. Do you find them equally contemptible? Heck no you don't.... You've sited them before haven't you? Thanks for your denials. However, I'll stand by my assertions, because even you know that I'm right.

and if you feel compelled to defend them, by all means be my guest

Nope. I made it real clear that I was not, nor did I care to attempt to defend them. I merely asked you a simple question.

I thought you were better than that, though. Maybe you're less "independent" than you thought you were!

I'm really not sure that you are capable of even defining independent. Trust me..... Compared to where I was 10 years ago, know that I am extremely independent. Unlike many, I tired of the hypocrisies of the politicians that I once believed in and supported. Going back to that old Hillary joke.... this puppy had his eyes opened in a very big way.

Good evening my friend.

BTW Bas... I understand your partisanship and faithfulness. It was tough for me to admit the folly of it all too.

________
In regards to Democrats, Republicans, gangs, and other scads of coterie Kool-Aide drinkers; Remember this..... Eagles Don't Flock

Git, I recognize that you as an "independent" have a vested interest in attempting to keep me as a Democrat on the defensive by continually challenging the content of my posts.

It's a fool's errand to attempt to live up to the standard you have set for me, holding me to one standard while allowing others free reign to post whatever they wish. Can you say "double standard"?

You charges have absolutely no credibility. Let me make a suggestion: why not practice what you preach and hold some of the "independents" and Republicans to the same standard you're attempting to force upon me. RetArmyMajor, enigma, and/or other side trax would be a good place to start, any of those have a history of partisanship here. Show me your deeds can match your mouth and we can revisit this issue in the future, deal?

Until then, I'm afraid I'm destined to disappoint you time and again...but that's a risk I'm willing to take.

Have a splendid Sunday!

p.s. The Klan comment was beneath you. Shame.

attempting to keep me as a Democrat on the defensive

(eyes rolling again) Oh yeah... that's it.

Can you say "double standard"?

Incorrect my friend. The established fact is that I do skirmish with the Republicans often on issues and have called them out on the hypocrisies of their candidates. You are just unwilling to accept that fact because you know I'm right.

hold some of the "independents" and Republicans to the same standard you're attempting to force upon me. RetArmyMajor, enigma, and/or other side trax would be a good place to start,

In recent times, I ignore most of it from both sides and don't get in between many of the partisan bickering sessions as it's usually a waste of effort, time and words as each other's minds are stuck in their own agendas. And yes, I confess even I am guilty of that. I've come to the conclusion that it's useless to discuss the war, tax reform, and other important issues on here because if it's a conservative idea, it automatically disqualifies it's validity in the eyes of the opposing party. Take tax reform. Instead of complimenting many of the quality merits of the Fair Tax and creatively discussing possible solutions to some of the possible inadequacies of the plan, many take a stand against it without offering any new ideas or solutions to improve the plan or offer viable options. Instead the same old class warfare crap pops up. So why get in the middle of that anymore? The same result will occur with this conversation. All you see is a perceived partisan attempt on my part to distract you from your Democrat agenda. Yawn.... Boy, does this board reflect Washington or what? With that said we sure don't have much hope in enacting workable solutions for our future... do we?

Show me your deeds can match your mouth and we can revisit this issue in the future, deal?

I freely admit that I have blood on my hands too. But, at least I make many an effort at independent thought. Something that you are safe from ever being accused of. I present to you with confidence that I have indeed attempted to make my "deeds match my mouth". I read every post that comes across this board and I have given merit to many things you and others on your side have said and have occasionally adjusted my views accordingly in an attempt to formulate a workable solution. Don't get me wrong my friend. Even you have occasionally pointed out policy flaws on issues that have caused me to rethink angles of certain issues. I will say that I truly appreciate that. But rarely have I ever heard practical solutions grace your lips.... just your attacks.

Until then, I'm afraid I'm destined to disappoint you time and again...but that's a risk I'm willing to take.

How can one be disappointed in something when they already know what to expect from someone. I'd have to say that the only thing that disappoints me is your refusal to answer this question: If the assertions of Enigma's website proved to be true, would you alter your support Obama? Below is the unanswered question that this entire discussion revolves around, and that you refuse to answer. So I have to ask... who is trying to distract who?

GIT ASKS: If their research is accurate and true would you retract your typical nasty description of these "bozos", or does the truth not matter as long as the accused is running as a Democrat? Why do I suspect that if Obama were running as a Republican your agenda and attitude would be the same as the one you have toward any other Republican candidate.

On second thought, I'm not disappointed that you refuse to answer the question.... I've come to expect it.

p.s. The Klan comment was beneath you. Shame.

Again, you take the bait and miss the point. It's expected.....

It's time to cook me some eggs over easy in the grease left over from the cooking of that pepper bacon my bride just cooked up. Wish you were here. Talk in a bit and have a wonderful day.

________
In regards to Democrats, Republicans, gangs, and other scads of coterie Kool-Aide drinkers; Remember this..... Eagles Don't Flock

It will happen to anybody who challenges the Republicans. You've got to get used to it.

Look what the Swift Boat people tried to do to McCain in South Carolina:

Sliming McCain

The candidates have got to be able to respond to the smears without sending everyone to snopes.com

Y'all have forced me to write another limerick. Your fault. Don't be blaming me:

Obama, whose quest was ancillary
Was the candidate the right liked to pillory.
The Swift Boaters did slime him
With lies that were so grim,
That they ended up electing Hillary.

The election this year will be fun
McCain's had an interesting run
Poor John's come up short
Though he's won the support
Of that traitor named Joe Lieberman

shiffles? Freudian slip? or just commentary?

I yam what I yam....Popeye