Baby Boots February 18, 2010

I don’t know who makes these boots… but I want to do business with them:

Maybe the makers of these boots should merge with the makers of the baby slippers.

(Thanks to Matt for the link!)

"The way republican politics are going these days, that means the winner is worse than ..."

It’s Moving Day for the Friendly ..."
"It would have been more convincing if he used then rather than than."

It’s Moving Day for the Friendly ..."

Browse Our Archives

What Are Your Thoughts?leave a comment
  • Wendy


    Oh Hemant I thought for sure you knew about that site. There’s tons of edible babies (in cake form).

  • Jennifer

    Cakewrecks dot com! It was a halloween costume!

  • Those are just….weird.

  • Hemant,

    All due respect, but the baby thing is getting a bit weird.

  • Martin

    You are entitled to your opinion of course, but this really doesn’t do atheists any favours. It’s inviting people to call you, and by extension all atheists, a godless baby stomper.

  • Sue

    I think those boots are based on this cake:

  • All due respect, but the baby thing is getting a bit weird.

    It’s been weird for me since the first one. It might be one of the dumbest ongoing jokes I’ve ever seen on a blog.

    It’s just not edgy-funny, it’s just dumb as hell.

  • Angie

    I like the ongoing baby humor, myself. Keep it coming!

  • Sue

    I like the baby humour. I think babies dressed as corn and tacos are cute and funny, and I’m all for playing up the absurdity of stereotypes.

  • Betsy

    I’m with those who are over the baby humor. It’s juvenile and not the least bit funny. Time to end it.

  • mahantas

    I didn’t realize it was humor… Have I been doing this wrong? You’re not ACTUALLY supposed to eat the baby?

  • Nikki

    The boots from Cakewrecks are funny; the slippers, not so much.

  • indyfreethinker

    Not funny. My sense of humor can be as dark as anyone’s, but this crosses a line. Are we deliberately trying to give pro-lifers more ammunition? This does nothing for our case except reinforce the image of “babykilling”, which is decidedly not what the pro-choice position is about.

error: Content is protected !!