PS You keep repeating the same stupid useless argument:
Or maybe I just don't like blogpimps who rip off material.
He's not "ripping off material" he's QUOTING AND LINKING TO IT, as opposed to the way that the SITE YOU LINKED TO wrote earlier
"The prosecution will argue that one of the boys handed out condoms to the other five as they agreed to take turns raping the girl in the Stockholm suburb Tensta, Sveriges Radio (SR) reported..."AND DID NOT LINK TO THEIR SOURCE.
Everyone here would applaud if you stuck to attacking DUMB, ANTI-CONSERVATIVE "bloggers" who were REALLY PIMPING to steal viewers from FR with fake Conservative themes; your problem is you attack REAL CONSERVATIVES, you have no clue what a blog is or isn't, you fail to note who does or doesn't even have advertising, and most important, you distract from the message and info being posted.
IOW, you are doing EXACTLY what THE REAL ENEMIES OF FR WISH FOR.
Barack Hussein Obama says, "THANK YOU, HUMBLE GUNNER."
So you have objections to my posts.
And I have objections to thieving blogpimps.
Beautiful, ain’t it?
And where in that sequence does his blog become a needful element?
Why not link to the article and comment here?
In what way does this diminish ANY message?
How does this accomplish any nefarious end, removing a useless link from the info chain?
Seems to me it does nothing but provide more undiluted content, devoid of third party commentary.
Which commentary, by the way, could be made right here before a greater audience.
SO I ask..
Where does homeboy's blog fit in as a needful element?