This weeks Weekend Caption Contest™ was another smash hit, generating over 150 entries. In the vast history of the Weekend Caption Contest I can’t remember a winner from the very first entry, but even a non-LOTR fan like me can see the humor in a Gollum reference… The assignment this week was to caption the following picture:
Here are the winning entries:
1) (solo) – “He has our prrrrecious“
2) (McGehee) – “A census taker once tried to test me. I ate his liver with some fava beans and a nice chianti.“
3) (Rodney Dill) – “Tazers, not just for self-defense anymore.“
]]>< 
Oops, I missed the contest.
“Hillary, you are a stupid lemon eater!”
Reference: Dilbertblog
If you don’t stop giving me wedgies Karl, I’ll kill ya.
Thanks Kevin, Another great picture. This picture was showing up everywhere this week-end
Amazing! The winners were announced on time. That has to be a Wizbang record. (Yuk, Yuk)
Seems kind of stupid to me to post a bad photo of Hillary Clinton – sort of grade schoolish. There are millions of bad photos of politicians (Repub and Dem) all over. What does this prove?
For those of you who agree with Bush’s spying program, a link to a great article below….
MISINFORMATION ON SPYING DOESN’T TAKE A HOLIDAY
National Review’s Mark Levin “informs” his readers today:
Clinton bypassed FISA by extending warrantless searches to include physical searches.
Levin is referring to Clinton’s 2/9/95 executive order and his claim is totally false. First, FISA didn’t cover physical searches at the time, so the executive order did not, and could not, “bypass FISA.” Second, unlike the secret Bush administration program, Clinton’s public executive order did not apply to U.S. persons. If Bush’s program didn’t apply to U.S. persons there would be no controversy at all.
But Levin doesn’t have to read Think Progress to figure this out. He can read his own right-wing magazine. Here’s the National Review’s Byron York five days ago:
In the argument that has emerged over warrantless surveillance, there have been a number of overstatements. Some people, for example, have said that Bill Clinton signed an executive order authorizing such surveillance; he did not.
One clarification: when someone says something that’s not true, it’s not an overstatement, it’s a lie.
The hyperlinks are here:
http://thinkprogress.org/2005/12/26/no-holiday/
Well, I’m deeply flattered for having won this week’s caption contest and grateful for all the support of other posters (err..your money is in the mail).
I am, however, confused by Kevin’s reference to “Gollum humor”. Humor? What humor? I wasn’t trying to be funny! I’m relatively certain that this is EXACTLY what she was saying when the picture was taken!
Just like the pathetic creature Gollum/Smeagle in LOTR, her physical appearance has transformed to reflect the sheer madness burning within. A blind raging madness to posses the power of the “one true ring”/Presidency.
I’m convinced that by 2008, she’ll be knuckling around in a loin cloth, eating raw fish and referring to herself as “us”. And..God help us all if she ever gets her boney, filthy little fingers on it for she will surely plunge the earth into eternal darkness.
This woman is insane with and for power.
She’s a skank too.
Non sequitur Nick strikes again.
Sigh, no Mr Ho blurb. I bet he’s really Lyndon LaRouche. Makes Nick seem almost logical and coherent.
Solo, congrats!
Did she murder her sista to get a hold of the precioussss the first time (or does Vince count as that one)?
Actually, Nick makes a great point. If you want to be taken seriously, engaging in juvenile bad-photo posting seems counter-productive. Whether Hillary is a Democrat or Republican, the debate should be about issues and not whether she photograhs well. I’ve seen dozens of terrible pics of George Bush, but I don’t base my opinion of him on that.
Regarding the info about conservative truth-bending and accusations that Clinton spied, I’m not surprised that McGehee didn’t addressed that. McGehee?
Sorry, I think there’s a real big difference between bad photo posting on an article that is purporting to be a serious discussion/reporting on the merits of a politician or public figure, and bad photo posting on a caption contest that is meant to poke fun at someone.