I hope you insure this one properly.

If you win votes by creating programs to help the poor, isn't it in your best interest to have as many poor people as possible?  If you win votes by SUPPOSEDLY helping the wealthy, isn't it in your best interest that there be as many rich people as possible?  After all, Bill Gates has the same number of votes as the poor person on welfare.  How do Republicans win?  By giving political favors to wealthy donors?  To give political favors, you have to win office first.  This logic has never made sense to me.  It's so obviously to me that the Democrats are simply playing a numbers game to stay in power by playing Santa Clause with other people's money.  Why can't other people see it?  And what's so virtuous about being generous with other people's money anyway?

I gave up on scripted TV because I was sick of getting sucker punched, but recently, I heard good things about Portlandia from conservative sites, so I thought I'd give it a try.  I went back and watched every episode over the holidays.  It is truly funny.  While not strictly conservative, it makes fun of liberals, so that's good enough for me.  I highly recommend it.

Yes, Mark, all versions of "Baby It's Cold Outside" are sung that way.

I stopped 52 minutes in due to the sound quality.

This reminds me of Oprah starting the OWN network while she still had her TV show.

I've been a member for a couple of years now and I still don't completely understand how this sites works.  But if I understand correctly, one of the flaws of this thread is that the advice (however fantastic it is) is coming from people who are already members.  Maybe, in an effort to do market research, you could have a non-member thread open for a week or so to ask people what it would take to get them to join.  You may get responses like "I don't have a credit card and you don't take Paypal."  It may be helpful.

I think this is a great idea.  I'd love to sponsor the membership of military members, too.

Damian, I do not believe that is the argument Eeyore was making.  His point was that when these violent acts are committed in the UK, the law abiding citizens aren't allowed to defend themselves.  My impression is that if a homeowner stabs an intruder in the middle of the night with a kitchen knife in self defense, the homeowner is more apt to go to prison than the criminal.  It seems to me that more than an aversion to guns, the British have a low tolerance for lethal force, even if it's justified.  I don't understand this mentality.

I would say $10 million in net worth.

You have two different direct links.  One is for episode 5 and the one for episode 6 doesn't seem to work.

I love the David Bowie/Bing Crosby version.

I think Mona was too hard on Romney for the 47% comment.  He was right.  There is a certain percentage of the population that will never vote for him no matter what he says simply because he is a rich white Republican and for whom tax cuts do not resonate because they don't pay any federal income tax to begin with.

I think if you made proof of citizenship or legal residency a requirement to send your children to public school or apply for any federal benefits, the illegal immigration problem would go away.  Those that are here would self-deport and others wouldn't come in the first place.  If we make it impossible to live in this country if illegal, we won't even need a fence.

Whenever I hear liberals talk about how xyz issue disproportionately affects the poor, it reminds me of this line from The Heist:

“Everybody needs money. That's why they call it money.” - Danny DeVito as Mickey Bergman

ANYTHING that requires money disproportionately affects the poor.  That's why it's called being poor!

I found out what happened to the wall of rats:

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2225935/Hurricane-Sandy-probably-wiped-New-Yorks-rats-despite-warnings-rodent-apocalypse-say-experts.html?ICO=most_read_module