Bob--a little advice from me to you--hire a real editor for this site. There are so many misspellings and grammatical errors that it's embarrassing to read--even more embarassing than its embarassing content.

EG, it's obvious that nothing embarrasses this guy. It's like trying to make a leech feel shamed for stealing blood.
-q

I always take advice from people who get their news from the Sci Fi channel.

q and EG-- Bob clearly doesn't have enough going on in his life and does nothing but spend his day trying to have the last word on this ridiculous site. It's funny, as much as I think I don't want to come back and see what inane thing he's said this time, I'm always glad I did. I think it's that whole "oh, my god it's so horrible and pathetic I can't not look at it" feeling...Kind of like watching a duck try to make love to a football.

...now you're promoting beastiality? Don't you libs EVER draw the line?

Actually, beastiality is sex between an animal and a human. What you meant to say was fetishism; which is deriving sexual excitement from inanimate objects. In this case, it would be the duck that was suffering from fetishism. Although I suppose one could accuse me of promoting duck fetishism, or go even further and call me a Voyeur of duck fetishism.

And watching ducks TRY to make love to footballs is definitely where I draw the line. Watching ducks actually make love to footballs would be way too much for me to handle.

I am willing to concede that you, as liberal, know far more than I about sexual deviency whether it be beastiality, fetishism and various forms of perverted duck sex.

Congratulations, you won your first point on this site!

Yeah, imagine that, google (and the dictionary) does wonders for the liberal mind. When we want to know something we just look it up.

Silly me, how could I have expected Bob Cox to check his own facts?

Have you ever watched a duck wear a pig skin suit? What type of sex would that be?