[bonfire]

What bothers me is the folks who are upset missed the whole joke. You can't explain it to them because when you do, they STILL DON'T GET IT!!! Their minds immediately went to "dirty" and I find that disturbing.

I don't have any problem with someone who didn't think the jokes were funny. I DO have a problem with twisting something innocent into something perverted.

[dirtboy]

Their minds immediately went to "dirty"

Sorry, but you can protest otherwise all you want, but because of the way Laura set up the joke, it is a reasonable conclusion that she meant the joke to be interpreted that way. She set up the fact that Bush was such a city slicker by saying he tried to milk a horse. When she added it was a male horse, the joke got sent in a completely different direction. You may believe that she meant otherwise, but the dual inferrence was clearly there.

[brytlea]

I don't have any problem with someone who didn't think the jokes were funny. I DO have a problem with twisting something innocent into something perverted.

This is really an interesting tactic. So now those of us who thought the joke was inappropriate are perverts? This is the problem I have with this thread (and the one yesterday). We cannot disagree without name calling. Why do you feel the need to do this?
susie

[cubreporter]

Exactly. They are holier than thou and must have pure, unstained lives to this point. :)