Thursday, April 30, 2009

PUMAs- Still Moving Despite Brain Death

Remember the PUMAs? Well they're still there, and every once in a while I like to check in on them for their unique world view. Here's an incisive political analysis that I found on a PUMA site today:

"Increasingly, Barack Obama is a drag queen impersonator of Condolezza Rice."

This is the sort of well thought out analysis that is sure to be remembered as playing a vital part in our country's progress. I really want to thank them so much for their contribution to our national discourse.

Note to any PUMAs that might have stumbled upon this: I was being sarcastic. I am not sure that you are capable of figuring that out. Now, shut up and go home. Your cat box needs to be changed.

Don't Do It, Guy

Here's one of the stupidest things I've heard in years:

"Frank Luntz, the arch-conservative pollster known as the research hammer by which the Gingrich revolution came down hard on President Bill Clinton, wants to take over research for the entertainment industry."

Frank, a piece of well meaning advice. You see, in Hollywood they can generally tell whether your advice was any good by whether you help open the movie. In other words, your advice has to work.

Nothing you have ever done in the Republican party has prepared you for that.

A Big Surprise on Support Of Torture

From CNN:

"WASHINGTON (CNN) — The more often Americans go to church, the more likely they are to support the torture of suspected terrorists, according to a new analysis.....

White evangelical Protestants were the religious group most likely to say torture is often or sometimes justified ... People unaffiliated with any religious organization were least likely to back it."

Who could have ever suspected that?

Once again, something from the religious right too sad and disgusting to mock.

A New Height in Who Cares

From an article by one Joe Kovacs, over at our fave website, Renew America:

"For the first time, a U.S. Supreme Court justice is offering some legal insight about the so-called Fairness Doctrine, suggesting the off-the-books policy could be declared unconstitutional if it's revived and brought before the bench.

In written discussion on yesterday's ruling cracking down on indecent language on television, Justice Clarence Thomas called the policy "problematic" and a "deep intrusion into the First Amendment rights of broadcasters."

You know, Joe, no one in the world gives a flying fuck what this ignorant, dishonest cretin has to say about anything.

Not even you wingnuts do. You'd much prefer that he serve his appointed task of giving Antonin Scalia two votes on the court, and then just keep his mouth shut.

Offers We Are Not Likely To Accept





No Thanks.

Wrong and Dumb?

I love this line from a Power Line article:

"I find this story notable in several respects. First, though, let's acknowledge this this was a rare occasion when Congresswoman Bachmann, a very smart person, said something that was both wrong and--sorry, Michele--dumb."

Rare Occasion? RARE OCCASION? It's a rare occasion when Michelle Bachmann says something both wrong and dumb?

Man, are you full of it. Take it from someone who knows. Green Eagle lives off of the times Michelle Bachmann is both wrong and dumb. And believe me, Green Eagle is living large.

MORE: This idiot goes on to blame Michelle's repeated humiliations on liberal bloggers, who search her every word for what they refer to as "mistakes." Guy, it doesn't take much searching, believe me.

"It would be interesting to try to add up the number of times we here at Power Line have caught errors that were made by Democratic politicians."

But you see, with Michelle we're not talking errors. We're talking grotesque, mind boggling acts of unbelievable stupidity and ignorance, blended with a spectacular (even for the right) disregard for the virtues of honesty. Deal with it.

Scalia Speaks

Our great Supreme Court Justice and Mussolini fan Antonin Scalia speaks out:

"It is not a rare phenomenon that what is legal may also be quite irresponsible..... What can be said often should not be said. Prof. Reidenberg's exercise is an example of perfectly legal, abominably poor judgment. Since he was not teaching a course in judgment, I presume he felt no responsibility to display any."

When, Oh mighty Supreme Court Justice Antonin Scalia, will we be hearing you make a similar proclamation about the writings of your fellow Federal Judge, Jay Bybee? Could we elicit an opinion from you concerning Judge Jay Bybee's "abominably poor judgment?" Would you willing to go so far as to suggest that Judge Jay Bybee said "what...should not be said?"

No, I didn't think so. You have the time to rail against some college professor for a classroom assignment, but not to show any ire against one of the most loathesome criminals in the history of American justice.

Well, you are a Republican, after all.

By the way, this just occurred to me. Are you by any chance the same Justice Antonin Scalia who helped saddle our country with the worst President in history? No, that must be some other guy.

Superior Priciples

Longtime Republican religious nutcase Cal Thomas, today at Town Hall:

"Republicans...will continue losing elections if they stress only ideological purity instead of demonstrating that their principles are superior to those of welfare state Democrats."

Great idea, Cal. Here's a helpful suggestion along those lines: as soon as you figure out a way to convince people that torture is superior to health care for children, you are on your way.

I'd work on that if I were you. It may be your best shot.

Wednesday, April 29, 2009

Some Times You've Got to Wonder

I was looking at some wingnut website called Obama's Con. Here is an image from its header, which I really like:

Here's Obama letting his mask slip, and what's behind the mask? Wait....It's Obama!

Guys, I don't quite know how to break this to you, but I am afraid that you don't really get the mask thing.

See, when the mask slips, there's supposed to be something different underneath- you know, like the wolf in sheep's clothing.

As it is, you seem to be suggesting that Obama really is...Obama!
Not really much of a con there when you think about it.

A Theology Lesson from Father Gibson

Mel Gibson has this to say about his ex wife, whom he dumped after twenty some years:

" Gibson has an odd view of who is going to heaven and who is not. His wife, for example, is not, in the Gospel according to Mel. He acknowledges that she is "a saint, she’s a much better person than I am," but rules are rules. She is, he notes, "like, Episcopalian, Church of England. She prays, she believes in God, knows Jesus, she believes in all that stuff, but that's not good enough. And it’s just not fair if she doesn't make it," laments Mel, "but that’s a pronouncement from the chair. I go with it."

Well, at least she's lucky that Mel will not be driving her to heaven, because he would probably get arrested before he made it past Malibu.

Dr. Seuss

Man, the conservative mind is a wonderful thing. Here is an ad for a book described as follows (I kid you not):

"This book is a cross between Dr. Seuss and Ayn Rand’s Atlas Shrugged."

Oh boy, I can't wait to dig right in. I'm tempted to come up with a bunch of jokes like "This book is a cross between Moby Dick and the Sunset Western Garden Guide." But how could you ever hope to top what they already came up with?

At least I have to give them this: They've finally managed to place Atlas Shrugged in appropriate literary company.

McConnell Speaks His Mind!

From Newsmax:

"Minority Leader McConnell Says Specter Move a Threat to U.S.


Pennsylvania Sen. Arlen Specter is a Democrat again following a decades-long turn among Republicans, a defection that has the GOP warning about the perils of unchecked power only a few years after it controlled both the White House and Congress.

"The threat to the country presented ... by this defection really relates to the issue of whether or not in the United States or America our people want the majority party to have whatever it wants without restraint, without a check or balance," Senate Republican leader Mitch McConnell of Kentucky said Tuesday after Specter made his startling switch."

Of course, Mitch, you lying hypocrite, it never occurred to you to worry, did it, while your party was ruining the country economically, destroying its legal system, withering away its military in useless foreign adventures, and humiliating us all around the world, during your six years of one party rule. No, only now that it's the Democrats in charge does this grave threat impinge on your conscience.

And, Mitch, you know why the Democrats are on the verge of one party rule? Because, despite your years of lies and baiting and hatemongering, the American public elected Democrats to fix the damage your party caused. Now, get out of the way.

CEO President

Another highlight in conservative selective amnesia, from Human Events, which is providing me with a world of fun today:

"The President, Not the Nation's CEO
By Terence O. Moore"

Terence, I remember so many times when you and your fellow conservatives reacted strongly against the suggestion that any previous President should be considered the "CEO President."

I was curious about this. I tried googling "Bush CEO President", just to see. I got 5,030,000 hits.

100 Days

At Human Events, today:

"It Seems a Lot Longer
By Ted Nugent"

Ted, it always does when you're on acid.

Thanks, Michelle, for Helping to Keep Me in Business

Michelle Bachmann, as I have said before, the gift that keeps on giving, from the Congressional Record.

"FDR applied just the opposite formula--the Hoot-Smalley Act, which was a tremendous burden on tariff restrictions, and then, of course, trade barriers and the regulatory burden and tax barriers. That's what we saw happen under FDR. That took a recession and blew it into a full-scale depression. The American people suffered for almost 10 years under that kind of thinking."

Let me deal with the rest of the idiocy in this comment, before I get to my main point. First of all, Michelle, the name of this bill was the Smoot-Hawley Act. More about this name "slip" later. Second, it was passed in 1930, three years before FDR took office, by a Republican congress, and signed into law by a Republican President whom you may have heard of, named Herbert Hoover. Both Smoot and Hawley were Republicans. Finally, when Roosevelt took office, unemployment was 25%. Some recession.

Now, as to Michelle's "accident" with the name of this bill. Believe me, just like Michael Steele, this woman never makes a mistake. Everything she does has a deeply thought out purpose. Normally that purpose is to appear just as stupid and ignorant as her base, but here, I believe, it goes far beyond that. Honestly, I do not know who Hoot was, but I sure know who Stuart Smalley is.

Yes, in advance of his inevitable seating as a Senator from her home state, Michelle is already setting the groundwork for blaming Al Franken for the great depression.

You gotta love this woman.

News Flash

This Just In: Tom Friedman had a column in the New York Times today, in which he expressed his opinion.

Whatever.

More Washington Post Degradation

Richard Cohen in today's Washington Post, continuing their righteous crusade to enable torture:

"But it is important to understand that abolishing torture will not make us safer. Terrorists do not give a damn about our morality, our moral authority or what one columnist called "our moral compass."

But, you see, here is what you aren't considering, you pathetic moral degenerate: Terrorists might not give a damn about our morality, but if people don't see America as a nation of monsters, they might not become terrorists. When we invade their country and murder their relatives with impunity, destroy their infrastructure, unleash an orgy of secular violence, and turn their lives into a hopeless nightmare, how do you expect them to act? They are treating us like subhumans because in their eyes, those who do things like that are subhuman. And I have trouble arguing with that point of view.

I don't care if torture works. I am against it because I do not want to be a moral subhuman. I guess, for you, that's okay.

There's lots more in this article to make me mad, but I won't dignify this disgusting hack with any further comment. Read the piece yourself, if you want to waste your time.
Pat Toomey, the point man in the successful struggle to drive Arlen Spector out of the Republican Party, speaks out:

"In the end, the support from the three “moderates” was crucial to passing the stimulus bill. Because of Sen. Ted Kennedy’s absence, the GOP needed only one more Senate vote to mount a sustainable filibuster. Had even one of the apostates stood strong, Republicans would have been able to fashion a genuine compromise bill."

Point well taken, Pat. Along this line of reasoning, I would like to point out that if even one of the apostles stood strong, Satan would have been able to fashion a genuine compromise sermon on the mount. Including tax cuts for the Pharisees and more money for chariots.

Dennis Praeger, Still Going Strong

A wonderful, spot-on analysis from The Most Intellectually Dishonest Talk Radio Host In The History Of The World, Dennis Praeger:

"One assumes, furthermore, that all those Iraqi innocents Saddam had put into shredding machines or whose tongues were cut out and other hideous tortures would have begged to be waterboarded."

Okay, so far as it goes, Dennis. But how could they beg for anything after Saddam cut their tongues out?

Just wondering.

Jim Inhofe Speaks Out

Here's a wonderful, perceptive analysis of Arlen Spector's party switch, from a great champion of rational thought*, Sen. James Inhofe:

"Sen. Arlen Specter's decision to switch parties and run for reelection as a Democrat foreshadows a Republican landslide in midterm elections, Sen. Jim Inhofe (R-Okla.) argued Wednesday.

"This is the first visible evidence that what happened in 1993 is happening again now," Inhore said during an appearance on Fox News, arguing that the 2010 midterm elections will mirror the 1994 elections in which Republicans made major gains."

Uh huh, I buy that line of reasoning- the weaker you are, the stronger you are. It's kind of a zen thing.

I told you this was going to be fun, once the wingnuts had time to get up a head of steam.

*I mean, who could be better at perceiving the truth, free from ideological blinders, that the Senate's leading denier of gloval warming.

IN RELATED NEWS: This just in: Photo of Sonny Liston, ready to make a dramatic comeback against Muhammad Ali.

Tuesday, April 28, 2009

More Comic Relief


Here's a cute little cartoon from a Republican website. I have to say, though I appreciated the depiction of the transformation in the Appearance of Arlen Specter since yesterday, I thought the caption wasn't quite up to the masterful illustration, so I have taken the liberty of providing a suggestion of my own. By the way, isn't it interesting that the guy in the white coat seems to be holding a graph of GDP growth during the New Deal.

Inquiring Minds Want to Know

From Red State, the question on everyone's mind:

"As Barack Obama reaches the 100 day mark of his term as President, it’s time to pose a question: why is he so unpopular?"

Keep thinking that way, guys. Green Eagle needs the material.

It'sGood

Bill Kristol on Fox News, talking about Arlen Spector:

"It's good for the Republicans."

I kid you not.

Michelle Bachman Speaks Out


Michelle Bachmann, today:

"I find it interesting that it was back in the 1970s that the swine flu broke out then under another Democrat president Jimmy Carter," said Bachmann. "And I'm not blaming this on President Obama, I just think it's an interesting coincidence."

Michelle, I find it an interesting coincidence that so many of the stupid voters in this entire country live in your district.

But, you go, girl. Maybe you can make a few more adults ashamed to be members of your party.

Above, Michelle doing, uh, something.....really, I don't want to think about it, thanks.

Good Point, Michael

Michael Steele, on Arlen Spector:

"I'm sure his mama didn't raise him this way"

Thanks for that analysis, Michael.
Michael Steele- the gift that keeps on giving.

Comic Relief- Wingnut Style

Here's a quote from an article on my current fave wingnut site, Renew America:

"Did you know...the federal government is only constitutionally granted the authority to provide for our common defense? Our constitution is violated every time the federal government seeks to provide education, health care, financial aid...anything other than common defense."

Hmm. Here is another opinion of the constitutional role of the federal government:

"We the people of the United States, in order to form a more perfect union, establish justice, insure domestic tranquility, provide for the common defense, promote the general welfare, and secure the blessings of liberty to ourselves and our posterity, do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America."

When lies become this blatant, there really isn't much to say, is there? This opinion piece was written by one Mark West, who describes himself as "Corporate Office Manager for Mechanical Construction Services, Inc., in Newark, Arkansas, and serves in an evangelistic preaching ministry."

Mark, it seems to be beyond your intellectual capacity to make it through the first sentence of the actual Constitution. This leads me, O evangelic preaching minister, to wonder if you got far enough in the Bible to read that part where it says "thou shalt not bear false witness."

No? Okay, then.

Republican Spector Comment Digest

I thought, as a public service, I would assemble a little sample of early Republican online comments about Arlen Spector's party switch. Here goes. I have added some well thought out constructive comments, as usual.

"See ya

written by Libertariot, April 28, 2009
Don't let the door hit you on the way out! Toomey just became the nominee!"

Because it sure doesn't make any difference to us, how many Senators we have.

"Good riddance. Take Snowe and Collins with you."

Good idea. Let's see if we can work that out.

"
I wish the Republicrat Party was governing from the right..."

And I wish Santa would come twice a year. Before they can "govern from the right," they have to "govern." That involves "winning elections." Good luck with that.

"
Many good things will come out of this Specter situation and the Republican Party will be stronger in the end."

Right.

"Where does Rick Santorum stand in all this? Is it too late to possibly run him in 2010?"

Please. Go ahead. Make my day.

"The GOP moved left

Let us join the battle, and right soon. In case of defeat I need time to find a new country to emigrate to (or start my own!)."

How about Texas?

" (Senator) DeMint says he would rather have 30 Republicans in the Senate who really believe in principles of limited government, free markets, free people, than. . . 50 that don't have a set of beliefs."

How about five Republicans that REALLY believe that, in greed is the true salvation of mankind? I like that idea even better.

This remark is particularly ironic, since DeMint's endorsement of right wing wacko Pat Toomey to defeat Spector is being cited as a significant factor in Spector's decision.

"Just fine for the democrats to nominate an 80 year-old man who dyes his hair orange and has recurrent cancer. this is definitely change we can believe in."

Well, at least John McCain didn't die his hair. I think.

"Like his ideological soulmate, Sen. John McCain, Specter's reputation for bipartisan moderation was always a function of his vain desire to be perceived as a "public servant."

And, for real Republicans, there is nothing worse than being a "public servant." They know whom they are paid to serve.

Well, this is all still pretty mild. Like everyone experiencing a loss, the Republicans still have to go through the denial stage. I'll keep on this. In a day or two we will be seeing some real wackiness.

Specter

If you haven't been watching the news in the last half hour: Arlen Specter has announced that he is switching to become a Democrat.

I'm not making too much of this. Specter knows that he can't win the Republican primary in Pennsylvania, and he really wants to keep his seat. Specter has a long history of talking big, and then voting with the right when it comes down to it, so we will have to see if he is a Democrat in anything but name.

Still, with Franken that makes 60 votes.....

More: I just want to say that, over the decades, we have seen defections (usually, by the way going from Democrat to Republican), but I don't remember ever seeing such a high profile one. Could this, by any chance, precipitate further defections? I'm thinking of you, Susan and Olympia.

Still More: This is good for McCain.
Sorry, I couldn't resist.

Still More: All Spin Zone has a great speculation here. Could this precipitate that serious politician and sincere bipartisan, Holy Joe, to become a Republican? I can hear his speech now about what a threat to the country it would be if Democrats had the power to enact a legislative agenda supported by the large majority of the American people, without gutting everything at the humble request of Republican lunatics.

Yet More Again: I heard an idiot on MSNBC claiming that "some Republicans are happy about this." Yeah, like you're happy when your dog dies.

More-More-More: I just heard that Michael Steele is now referring to Specter as "left wing." Does anyone remember that, in the 1950's, the John Birch Society claimed that Eisenhower was a communist? We're getting close to that territory now.
Hang on. This is going to be a great ride.

Monday, April 27, 2009

Efficacy of Torture Revisited

Here is something that I have been meaning to say for a while about the efficacy of torture.

Eight years ago, three thousand Americans were killed by terrorists. That works out, between then and now, to about 375 per year.

Every year in this country, 40,000 people die in traffic accidents, or about 100 times as many per year as the terrorists killed. Yet I don't find myself quaking in fear like a scared bunny rabbit every time I get into a car. Sure, I want to see the government do what it can to minimize traffic fatalities, which is what they do by building safe roads and traffic signs, and enforcing speed limits. But, you know what? Like practically every other American, I accept the danger, as an acceptable risk in return for my right to go anywhere I want in this country.

Well, you know what? I know perfectly well that, sometime, somewhere, the terrorists are likely to strike our country again. I accept that risk as the price I have to pay, in order to not have to live through the spectacle of America turning into a murderous, barbarian, morally empty shell of what the founding fathers thought they were creating.

I hear so much from the people on the other side of this "debate," about what rough, tough manly cowboys they are. But apparently, inside, they are the most craven of cowards, who will sell their American birthright without a thought to avoid the slightest risk to themselves. These people are the most contemptible of our fellow citizens, and they deserve to be ignored, or ostracized from civilized company.

Cartoon


I loved this wingnut cartoon until I looked at it carefully and realized that it is a picture of Obama there.

I thought it was me.

Republican Image Outrage Report

As there is nothing which is a sufficient target for the right's endless stock of hatred and phony outrage, It sometimes strikes at some very amusing things.

The first of these pictures was painted by some guy in New York. I'm not going to tell you that it is a particularly good painting, or that it is appropriate to exploit religious imagery in this way. Still, it is the product of one person with no connection to Obama.
So why is the Wingnutosphere awash in epidemic wailing about how this picture proves that Obama thinks he's Jesus?

Take my word for it (don't waste your time checking for yourself), this is one of the big right wing issues of the day! Glad they can find substantive issues in their desire to destroy Barack.

Here's another image that has aroused some ire on the right. Yes, that's a statue of Obama, sitting on a live donkey. This is somehow also interpreted as some kind of slur against Jesus, because it is a well known fact that Jesus once rode on a donkey himself. By that logic, it could equally well be a slur on Gabby Hayes. That possibility was not considered, in my opinion a big mistake, since Gabby Hayes has always been recognized as a defender of liberty, and not a cowardly, anti-american Muslim.

Well, good luck with this, guys. I am sure that your great plan for recovering your control over our government includes, as an early step, making total fools out of yourselves, in order to show solidarity with your "base." Still, I'm just not sure that it is going to work.


P.S. That "making total fools out of yourselves" thing? I've got to admit, you're doing a great job there.

Dick. Really

I have thought of commenting about the Dick Cheney torture brouhaha, but I think someone beat me to it.
Paul Raushenbush, at Huffington Post has this to say:

"When we get people who are more concerned about reading the rights to an Al Qaeda terrorist than they are with protecting the United States against people who are absolutely committed to do anything they can to kill Americans, then I worry.... These are evil people. And we're not going to win this fight by turning the other cheek.
--Former Vice President Dick Cheney, February 4, 2009[1]

But I tell you who hear me: Love your enemies, do good to those who hate you, bless those who curse you, pray for those who mistreat you. If someone strikes you on one cheek, turn to him the other also. If someone takes your cloak, do not stop him from taking your tunic. Give to everyone who asks you, and if anyone takes what belongs to you, do not demand it back. Do to others as you would have them do to you.
--Jesus, Luke 6:27-31.

These two opposing statements by former Vice-President Dick Cheney and Jesus Christ bring into sharp relief the contradictions of being a country that simultaneously lays claim to Judeo Christian values while going to any lengths to protect and preserve the American empire - including torture."

Couldn't have put it better myself. I'm not sure what position in the government that second guy holds, but he can sure sum it up.

Pammy, Pammy, Calm Down

Little Pammy Geller over at Atlas Shrugs is at it again:

"It strikes me as bloody savage that militant Muslims in Congress (whose trip to the hajj on the Muslim Brotherhood's dime) are protesting for "muslims in Darfur"

Militant Muslims in Congress! My god, Pammy, how many are there? Three? Seventeen? A thousand? This is horrible! Please let us know who these militant Muslims in Congress are, and what awful acts of terrorism they have committed!

You know what, you disgusting swine? Go to hell. We've got enough troubles in this country (virtually all of them due to people like you,) and we don't need this turgid, lying garbage. Just go to hell. The sooner the better.

Incorrect, Indeed

I was over at Human Events (I know. I'm a glutton for punishment) reading a review of a new book cleverly titled, The Politically Incorrect Guide to the Great Depression and the New Deal, by one Robert P. Murphy.

This book, apparently asks the vital question:

“How in the world did historians manage to teach generations of children that the New Deal ended the Depression?”

This question certainly deserves an answer. Perhaps, it was by showing them the following chart:

I want to note that Mr. Murphy apparently ridicules the comments of one Paul Krugman, newspaper commenter. Now, of course, there is no reason to suspect that this Paul Krugman has any knowledge of the subject of economics, so I guess this is fair criticism.

In the interest of full disclosure, I must admit that I got the little chart shown here from an article by the same Paul Krugman.

You know, I have a suggestion. Mr. Murphy, in all fairness, I think you should consider a slight change in the title of your book. I'd call it The Factually Incorrect Guide to the Great Depression and the New Deal.

After all, for your intended audience, "factually incorrect" is a feature, not a bug.

Sovereignty International


I found a particularly nasty anti-Obama screed on Renew America, today, and was going to subject it to its deserved dose of ridicule. In the course of checking it out, I found that its author was the head of an organization called Sovereignty International, Inc, whose name alone is beyond meaningful mockery.

Anyway, here is the cover of a book that this organization is flogging, apparently linking the United Nations with the Earth exploding in a ball of flame.

Nothing I could possibly say would discredit these lunatics more than this image.

A LITTLE MORE: This wanker is also the head of the "Environmental Conservation Organization," which is described as follows:

"Environmental Conservation Organization is a US-based organisation that was "founded in 1988 when 17 national organizations met in Chicago to devise a strategy to protect private property rights from erosion by excessive environmental regulations."

In other words, to prevent conservation. The right wing mind is a wonderful thing.

Torture Mendacity- A Challenger Appears

Unfortunately, it seems that I am going to have to quote at length again from a Washington Post opinion piece, this one from Michael Scheuer, who may just have moved ahead of David Broder in the race for the 2009 Wormtongue award for Cravenness.

Here we go, with my helpful and well-meant comments:

"In surprisingly good English, the captive quietly answers: 'Yes, all thanks to God, I do know when the mujaheddin will, with God's permission, detonate a nuclear weapon in the United States, and I also know how many and in which cities." Startled, the CIA interrogators quickly demand more detail. Smiling his trademark shy smile, the captive says nothing. Reporting the interrogation's results to the White House, the CIA director can only shrug when the president asks: "What can we do to make Osama bin Laden talk?"

Mikey, let me just ask you this: Do you really think we should base our national foreign policy on you masturbatorial juvenile fantasies? You do? Oh right, I guess you are a Republican.

"Americans should keep this worst-case scenario in mind as they watch the tragicomic spectacle taking place in the wake of the publication of the Justice Department's interrogation memos."

No, the worst case scenario will be when Osama announces that he is an emissary from the Rat King of Venus, come to prepare the human race for its new role as feed for the Rat King's ten million spawn. Then, you will undoubtedly be screaming that, in response, we need to spray arsenic over the entire middle east, as well as sections of Michigan and New Jersey. I want to point out that there is as much evidence for my scenario as yours.

Just as an aside, I would not describe those memos as tragicomic. I don't get the comedy. Tragic would be a sufficient adjective, in my opinion.

"It will help them recognize this episode of political theater as another major step in the bipartisan dismantling of America's defenses based on the requirements of presidential ideology. George W. Bush's democracy-spreading philosophy yielded the invasion of Iraq and set the United States at war with much of the Muslim world. "

George W. Bush's democracy-spreading philosophy? I don't even have any sarcasm up to dealing with this malicious, evil lie. Listen, Buster, it wasn't until all of Bush's other justifications for attacking Iraq were proven to be total lies, that he started raving about democracy. Can I remind you that he didn't give a God damn about democracy here at home? I guess you had forgotten that.

And by the way, the "bipartisan dismantling of America's defenses" is a lie. George W. Bush dismantled our defenses by laying waste to our military and alienating any support we might have had from other countries. I don't remember you squawking about that.

"In a breathtaking display of self-righteousness and intellectual arrogance, the president told Americans that his personal beliefs are more important than protecting their country, their homes and their families."

Look, this is such a malicious, ugly lie that it doesn't deserve comment. I can't take this any more. You can go read the rest if you want to. Virtually every line in it is a deliberate mockery of what this country is supposed to be about. These people are filled with a hatred so profound that it has rendered them oblivious to not only American values, but any shred of common human decency.

And, yes, Mr. Scheuer, Osama may be determined to do whatever he can to harm us. But he doesn't even come close to people like you in the threat he poses to our country.

Republican Fiscal Responsibility In Action

Courtesy of Daily Kos, this excerpt from Republican Senator Susan Collins' own website, from February 5:

"After meeting with Mr. Obama, Sen. Collins expressed concern about a number of spending provisions, including $780 million for pandemic-flu preparedness."

Senator Collins succeeded in having this horrible example of unnecessary Democratic pork removed from the budget.

Our Republican party, looking after your interests in their traditional manner.

In related news, the NYT reports that Wall Street compensation is returning to 2007 levels.

Update: From The Nation:

"
George Bush's political manipulator (that would be Karl Rove, for those of you who didn't figure that out) dismissed Obey's proposals as "disturbing" and "laden with new spending programs." He said the congressman was peddling a plan based on "deeply flawed assumptions."

Like what?

Rove specifically complained that Obey's proposal included "$462 million for the Centers for Disease Control, and $900 million for pandemic flu preparations."

Sunday, April 26, 2009

A Profound Thought

You know what just occurred to me? Obama has two daughters, George W. Bush has two daughters, Clinton has one daughter.....all girls!

When was the last time that a President had a boy?

Oh wait, I remember now. Okay, I guess we'd better stick to girls.

About that Flu Thing

I had someone ask me why I haven't said anything about the swine flu threat.

The answer is that I can't think of a thing to say about it yet.

I know that this is a poor excuse, because I can generally always come up with an assortment of cheap slurs and insults with which to reply to any situation. So, I'll make this promise: I will have more to say about the flu as soon as I can figure out a way to blame it on Dick Cheney.

Some Positive News

Here's something that fills me with considerable hope for the future of our country. Have you noticed that nobody seems to mention Matt Drudge any more?

That's change we can believe in.

Can You Imagine?

From the San Francisco Examiner today:

"As everyone knows, President Obama inherited a multitude of domestic and international problems. But of all the foreign dilemmas right now, none rivals Pakistan. It is in serious danger of falling to the Taliban.

Can you imagine - a large, nuclear-armed state in Central Asia, ruled by cousins of the people who governed Afghanistan when it served as a congenial home for Osama bin Laden and all his murderous minions?"

Well, if you are a Green Eagle follower, you can imagine it, as we've been talking about it for a while now. Nothing really new to report today, but I don't think we can afford to just forget about this situation until disaster strikes. The worst of it is, that no one seems to have a clue about what to do to get the Bush-coddled Pakistani government to act responsibly, and every day that passes is one day closer to the possession of nuclear weapons by Islamicist lunatics.

Have a nice day.

I'll Take This Deal

Gary Bauer, at Human Events, in a post that's too boring to link to, spews out the current Republican talking point:

"Now, with the revelation that many members of both parties, from House Speaker Nancy Pelosi on down, were well aware of the enhanced interrogation techniques used in the dark days following 9-11, the question becomes: If Obama decides to prosecute, how many in his own party will need legal counsel?"

You know what, Gary? I'll take that deal. If it turns out that Nancy Pelosi and Jane Harman were in on the torture, I'm happy to send them off to prison. Just as long as they are accompanied by George W. Bush, Dick Cheney, Don Rumsfeld, Condoleeza Rice, David Addington, Jay Bybee, John Yoo, John Ashcroft, Colin Powell, Porter Goss and every other sick Republican pervert who participated in this abomination.

You see, here is what you don't understand. You Republicans may not give a God damn about right and wrong when it stands in the way of your party and its unamerican goals. Democrats are different. Believe it or not, we actually care about something other than our own pathological self interest. What is is we believe in? That our government does not need to become a pack of criminals for us to survive.

I Wonder

"When asked about the Obama administration’s plan to release more garish photos of terrorist detainee interrogations, (Newt) Gingrich said, “I think that is a sick, anti-American behavior.”

I wish someone would ask Newt if the conduct shown in the photos is also "a sick, anti-American behavior.”

Update: I just want to add the following: God, please, please, bless us by making this guy the Republican presidential candidate in 2012

David Broder- Crime is Just Fine with Me

Those of you who have read this blog know that, being a fan of Gilbert and Sullivan, I generally prefer the short sharp shock; sadly, sometimes this isn't adequate. Here is an example- an absolutely execrable opinion piece in the Washington Post, by David Broder.

For those of you who are not familiar with David Broder, he is frequently referred to as the "Dean of the Washington press corps." Mr. Broder earned this title, I believe, by the achievement of having been wrong about every single political issue since, approximately, the assassination of Archduke Ferdinand.

Mr. Broder's article is entitled "Stop Scapegoating." Scapegoating, just for your information, is the Republican term for holding Republicans responsible when they have broken the law. This is as opposed to the deep, righteous indignation that leads, for example, to impeaching Bill Clinton for getting a blow job.

Well, let's start in on this malicious nonsense:

"But now Obama is being lobbied by politicians and voters who want something more -- the humiliation and/or punishment of those responsible for the policies of the past. They are looking for individual scalps -- or, at least, careers and reputations.

Their argument is that without identifying and punishing the perpetrators, there can be no accountability -- and therefore no deterrent lesson for future administrations. It is a plausible-sounding rationale, but it cloaks an unworthy desire for vengeance."

Of course, we are motivated by nothing but vengeance when we desire the "punishment of those responsible" for committing one of the most loathesome crimes known to man, in our name. It seems to be outside his grasp that we might be motivated by a desire for justice, generally not considered an unworthy motive.

Broder famously said, of Clinton, in 1998, "He came in here and he trashed the place," says Washington Post columnist David Broder, "and it's not his place." Bush and Cheney, of course, did not trash the place by humiliating every single person in the entire country.

"The torture issue is much more serious, and Obama needs to take it on himself, as he started to do -- not pass the buck to Attorney General Eric Holder..."

Wrong again, David, and you know it damned well. It is the job of the Justice Department to prosecute criminals, and that prosecution should proceed based on the facts of the case, not on Presidential whim. Interference in the legal process by politicians was George Bush's stock in trade, and it is part and parcel of what got us into this ugly situation. Of course, it never occurred to you to object to that, you dishonest hack.

"The memos on torture represented a deliberate, and internally well-debated, policy decision, made in the proper places -- the White House, the intelligence agencies and the Justice Department -- by the proper officials."

What's your point, David? That blatant, open criminality of the most debased sort is somehow better if the perpetrators really thought it out in advance? Or is it just that anything is okay if the "adults" in the Republican party do it?

"One administration later, a different group of individuals occupying the same offices has -- thankfully -- made the opposite decision. Do they now go back and investigate or indict their predecessors?

That way, inevitably, lies endless political warfare. It would set the precedent for turning all future policy disagreements into political or criminal vendettas. That way lies untold bitterness -- and injustice."

Listen, David, I know you are not too stupid to understand this: Opposition to the most degraded criminal behavior does not constitute a "policy disagreement" with the criminals. And putting those criminals in jail dosn not amount to "injustice." In fact, prosecuting and punishing criminals is normally known by quite another word. That word is "justice."

Don't even try to tell us that you don't understand that. So what is your motive in attempting to argue away the worst sort of barbarism? I'd really like an answer to that question, if there is an answer beyond the fact that you are a paid liar. And by the way, I don't really care if the moral cretins of the Bush administration end up bitter.

And, as to your sudden concern about "endless political warfare," Look out of your window, David. That's what the Republican party is going to throw at the Democrats from now until eternity, regardless of what Obama does. So he might as well do the right thing, rather than hide his head in the sand like you.

"Suppose that Obama backs down and Holder or someone else starts hauling Bush administration lawyers and operatives into hearings and courtrooms.

Suppose the investigators decide that the country does not want to see the former president and vice president in the dock. Then underlings pay the price while big shots go free. But at some point, if he is at all a man of honor, George W. Bush would feel bound to say: That was my policy. I was the president. If you want to indict anyone for it, indict me.

If George W. Bush is at all a man of honor? Listen, you Jackass: George W. Bush is NOT at all a man of honor. Men of honor do not torture. They do not lie to the American people any time it meets their convenience. They do not perpetrate aggressions against innocent countries. They do not enable the theft of our national wealth by the rich.

There is no human being in this country who is less a man of honor than George W. Bush and Dick Cheney, although those who are willing to prostitute themselves attempting to protect Bush and Cheney from the consequences of their criminality come in a close second.

George W. Bush has never in his entire life taken responsibility for anything he has done. What perversity could lead you to claim that he will start now?

"Is that where we want to go? I don't think so."

I've got news for you, buddy. It may not be where you want to go, but there is a sizable group of people in this country that do want to go there. That group would be known as "decent human beings."



Update: Glenn Greenwald has written a great reply to Broder's article at Salon.

He says, "I read David Broder's truly wretched screed yesterday.... and decided that I wouldn't write about it until today because I didn't want it to infect my Saturday."

I repeat this comment because I felt exactly the same way. I read this Broder piece yesterday, and knew that it would take a day before I could face writing about it.

Saturday, April 25, 2009

Losing is for Losers


I just stumbled upon this poster, from last year, I guess.

Losing is for losers- Right on, baby!

Democrat Socialists, Part 2

I promised to keep abreast of Republican plans to rename the Democratic party. Their new name, as you may remember was the "Democrat Socialist Party." About this:

" ...complained a well-connected Republican sympathetic to Steele: “It’s not that they’re not well-intentioned, but it’s just juvenile.”

Who could question that? Of course the suggestion to give the Democrats a name reminiscent of 1950's East Germany, was "well-intentioned." It is just one more sign of the tremendous Republican bipartisan spirit that we have come to appreciate so much, that they would offer this extremely helpful suggestion to their fellow Americans across the aisle.

Badly


The person shown here is (presumably) a human being, who writes for the Telegraph, in England. This is a newspaper that has taken upon itself to prove to the world that the deep mental disturbance that we have come to know as "conservatism" does not stop at our border. Here is what he has to ask today:

"Barack Obama and the CIA: why does President Pantywaist hate America so Badly"

Now, I must say that, as a cowardly America-hating liberal myself, I have wondered long and hard about this question. Why is Barack Obama, the man I voted for, doing such a bad job of hating America?

Personally, I think there is so much more he could do to keep his campaign promise to hate America. Just to pick a couple of examples, he could disgrace our country around the world by showing contempt for common standards of morality. He could destroy the integrity of our legal system, leaving us stripped of our two hundred year long reputation as a nation of laws. He could turn us into the largest debtor nation on earth, compelled to grovel to dictatorships around the world, in order to avert a depression. He could work to provide us with the worst health care system in the developed world.

I could go on here, but I think you get the point. Barack, if you really want to hate America, you are going to have to do a better job than this.

Note: I posted this guy's picture here for a reason. I don't think we really need to pay that much attention to a wanker who goes this far out of his way to look like Prince Charles. Figure it out, guy, it's his money, not his looks, that makes him so popular with the girls.

Bill- Delusional

Bill Kristol, at the Weekly Standard, submitting his entry for the Most Delusional Person on Earth Award:

"Cheney in 2012!

Of course, everyone’s first choice for president in 2012 is Dick Cheney."

Of course.

No further comment needed.

It's All Their Fault

Here's a quote from National Review's The Corner, about why we should't prosecute our torturers. I found this masterpiece courtesy of the great Sadly No!

"Enforcement of the law is a significant consideration in any situation where the law has been, or may have been, broken."

Well, I'm glad they are at least willing to admit that. Continuing with this masterpiece of moral analysis:

"But it is a measure of how over-lawed we have become when people start thinking of law-enforcement as always the paramount consideration. In fact, it is sometimes not the paramount consideration even when it arguably should be. In a case that could potentially prompt unrest along racial or ethnic lines, for example, prosecutors will apply a higher standard of proof before charging — or even stay their hand entirely."

Oh, I so get it! I understand what the guy is saying here! We can't prosecute the torturers, and it is all the fault of the negroes.

Thank heaven for Conservative political thought. I don't think I would have ever figured this out on my own.

Banana Republics

The current marching orders to right wing lie spewers seem to include insisting that, if we prosecute Bush administration crimes, we are acting like a "banana republic."

From an excellent article at Media Matters, the following comment:

"....according to Amnesty International, Peru, one of the countries the Journal singled out for derision, convicted former President Alberto Fujimori of torture, kidnapping, and enforced disappearances in the 1990s in an action that Amnesty International called "a crucial milestone in the struggle against impunity for human rights violations in Peru." And Argentina recently convicted members of the nation's military regime of "kidnapping, torture and disappearance" charges, according to Amnesty International."

"Acting like a banana republic" would be a step up after Bush and Cheney.

Anonymous Sources Again

The Washington Post is at it as usual, using anonymous sources to talk away the sins of the Bush Administration. Today, it's the loathsome "Judge" Jay Bybee, in an article called "In an Outcry on Memo, Signer's Private Regret." Yeah, like all criminals, regret that he got caught. Here's a sample:

""I've heard him express regret at the contents of the memo," said a fellow legal scholar and longtime friend, who spoke on the condition of anonymity while offering remarks that might appear as "piling on." "I've heard him express regret that the memo was misused."

Okay, Jay. I may not be a Federal Judge, but I've watched a lot of episodes of Law & Order, so I know how this works. After you have been convicted, your demonstration of remorse can be taken into consideration in negotiating a small decrease in your prison sentence.

Sounds fair, Jay? No? Oh, right, the law doesn't apply to people like you.

Friday, April 24, 2009

Pat Buchanan Speaks

Pat Buchanan to this day remains a staple on cable "news." There's always been talk about just how far to the right this pathetic specimen of humanity really is. From an article by him at Human Events, we get some clues.

Pat says:

"Now, the change since the 1960s in the character of the nation has been great. The moral and social sappers spawned by that decade have done their work well. But Middle America yet remains a blood-and-soil, family-and-faith, God-and-country kind of nation."

Have you ever heard of "dog whistle" terms? These are phrases that. like dog whistles, are only perceived by certain groups. Usually, they are couched in code words that are understood by those on the right.

Here, I am focusing on the term "blood-and-soil." This may not be familiar to most people, so let me provide some background. From the website ShoahEducation.com:

"One of the most central "doctrines" or pseudo-doctrines to the Nazi Belief System was that of "Blood and Soil" or Blut und Boden. "Blood & Soil" was the foundational concept for other concepts such as "Lebensraum and was rooted in occultic philosophies prevalent in German mysticism and Ancient legend, which posited that German Racial Identity, was essentially tied literally and metaphorically to the land."

You may have never heard this term, but you can be sure that every hard right winger knows what it means.

Pat Continues:

"Rooted people love the things of the heart: God, country, family and faith."

These are presumably the real Americans, the opposite of "rootless" people. Now, who would rootless people be? You may have never heard the term used this way, but you can be sure that Pat's audience has. From Wikipedia:

"Rootless cosmopolitan (Russian language: безродный космополит, "bezrodniy kosmopolit") was a Soviet euphemism introduced during Joseph Stalin's antisemitic campaign of 19491953, which culminated in the "exposure" of the alleged Doctors' plot. The term "rootless cosmopolitan" referred mostly (but not only) to Jewish intellectuals, as an accusation in their lack of patriotism, i.e., lack of full allegiance to the Soviet Union."

Well, there you have it. The real Americans, who love God, country, family and faith, versus the evil, rootless Jews. Sound familiar? That's Pat.

A Body of Information

Some filthy wanker on the right has this to say today:

"Former Justice Department attorney David Rivkin has pointed out that the EITs described in the memos had been adapted from a U.S. military training program “used for years on thousands of American service members with the full knowledge of Congress.” That meant also that there was a large body of information on which to draw regarding both the effectiveness and the physical/psychological impact of the techniques."

You know, guys, there is a body of information on the moral impact of these techniques too. You may have seen it, as it is not even classified. It's called the Bible. Give it a try.

You might like to start with that "do unto others" part.

Now For Some Comedy Relief

Here's a site that asks the following urgent question:

"Did Barron Adolf Rothschild Hitler flee to Argentina after completing his Zionistic task to construct Israel, then, live till 1980's there, protected by Jewish community?"

Now, that's something we've all been worried about, isn't it?

Here are some of the other interesting issues this website has to discuss:

"Dear Jewish President Roosevelt, Slave Trade was your Family Business, Right?"

"Mr. Texe Marrs Confirms G. W. Bush is a Stealth Jew"

"9-11 Jewish Terrorist Faction, Did you really use SMALL TACTICAL HYDROGEN BOMB to demolish WTC towers?"

You will no doubt, be interested in discovering that Churchill and Stalin were also Jewish, and, surprise, surprise,

"Not even One Jew was Killed in Auschwitz's Gas Chamber"

Oh, I looked a little farther, and I have now learned that Osama Bin Laden, Bill and Hillary Clinton and Boris Yeltsin are also Jewish.

"
Hilary Rodham Clinton's real middle name is Rosenberg." Who knew? Of course, "Lenin's real name is Goldman."
And Wile E. Coyote's real name is Schmuel Eisenberg. I bet you didn't know that.

God in heaven above, there are some stupid people on this earth.

Note: I linked to this site because I thought that people who have never seen this kind of stuff would have trouble believing that it is real. If you need to take a look at it to convince yourself, go ahead, but I hate giving them the hits. By the way, it's one of the ugliest looking websites I have ever seen.


Oh No! Better Get Ready!

I found a new wacko website called (in an unusual fit of humor for a wingnut) "The Reality Check."
Here is a wonderful list of some of the things which they believe are going to result from Democrats over the next couple of years:

"• Higher prices for all goods and services

• Total government control of the media

• Total government control of the entire financial industry

• The end of free speech (US state police have already been apprised by the Obama administration’s DHS Chief Napolitano that all who hold conservative or third party viewpoints are to be considered ‘enemies of the state’)

Infanticide for failed abortions

• Total government control of ALL industries Obama et al deem “essential” (which is subject to change at a moment’s notice)

• The end to small business unless it supports the Left

• The end of the middle class—as Obama and Co and the globalists will have gutted the country’s treasury and placed US taxpayer money in their own pockets

• The criminalization of all political thought that is deemed non-supportive of the Left

• The prosecution of President George W. Bush for protecting the country against terrorists (in order to distract the masses from what Supreme Leader Obama and Co are really doing)

• The elevation of terrorists to a protected class (Islamists soon to be the global power elite’s Secret Police force?)

• Forced taxpayer funding for illegal immigrants

• The dismantling of the US’ southern border

• Major drug dealers covertly partnering with government

These are just a few of the stark horrors that are forthcoming—or have already arrived at our doorstep. "

Oh my God, no wonder we all need to go to tea parties!
I guess my favorite is the Islamist secret police force, although I also like the bit about partnering with drug dealers.

Wouldn't you love to have them explain what led them to believe this? I suspect the information was beamed down to them from Mars, through tiny rips in their tinfoil hats.

Stark Raving Mad, Indeed

Oh God, the news is full of great stuff today. From Newsmax:

"Has this homeland security secretary gone absolutely stark raving mad?" said Rep. Michele Bachmann, R-Minn."

Love this Headline

Why does this headline from the so-called "National Examiner" make me laugh?

"Polish Academy of Sciences Questions Gore's Man-Made Global Warming Theory"

Weak People

The subtitle of a post at Pajamas Media today provides such a great insight into the right wing way of thinking:

"How can we expect Iran, Venezuela, North Korea, or Russia to act responsibly if they believe they have nothing to fear from us?"

I'll tell you something I believe. Most people, when they think about what someone else might do, assume that that person would do what they would do. They generalize about people's behavior based on their own inclinations.

I believe that American conservatives are basically self-serving people, without a shred of morality. They know that nothing short of the threat of force will prevent them from taking whatever advantage of others they can. They assume that everyone else in the world is the same, and therefore nothing except fear can keep them in line. Despite their constant religious talk, they cannot really imagine that anyone might do anything because it is the right thing to do.

This is my view of the "Christian" right and conservatives in general, based on forty years of observation. They are, virtually without exception, weak people who must be forced to act responsibly.

Ollie North- What a Character

Ollie North, in some stupid right wing blog:

"Jimmy Carter's naked quest for a "peacemaker's legacy" always will bear the miserable taint of his bungling during the Iranian hostage crisis."

Would that be the failed Iran hostage rescue attempt, operational commander one Oliver North? Oh, you forgot to mention that detail, didn't you.

Get Ready for a BIG SURPRISE

The NYT today:

"For more than a decade the Global Climate Coalition, a group representing industries with profits tied to fossil fuels, led an aggressive lobbying and public relations campaign against the idea that emissions of heat-trapping gases could lead to global warming.

But a document filed in a federal lawsuit demonstrates that even as the coalition worked to sway opinion, its own scientific and technical experts were advising that the science backing the role of greenhouse gases in global warming could not be refuted."

WHAT? They actually knew that global warming was real, but they still spent millions to shriek at us that it was not? Who would have ever believed that?

Next thing you know, some one is going to try to claim that Mitch McConnell, James Inhofe, Dick Cheney and the rest of them knew this too, and have been lying to us all along. It couldn't possibly be true that these dedicated public servants would knowingly let the world go to hell, to protect the short term profits of energy companies. No, that couldn't be the explanation.

The World's Most Dangerous Country- Part 3 or 4 already

From Yahoo (similar, if not more apocalyptic things all over the news today):

"ISLAMABAD – Taliban militants have extended their grip in northwestern Pakistan, pushing out from a valley where the government has agreed to impose Islamic law and patrolling villages as close as 60 miles from the capital. Police and officials appear to have fled as armed militants also broadcast radio sermons and spread fear in Buner district, just 60 miles from Islamabad, officials and witnesses said Wednesday."

The NYT reports today, as anyone following this story has long known, that the Pakistani army, which the Bush administration financed with billions in aid, is totally uninterested in engaging these people, focusing instead on the nonexistent threat of an invasion by India.

This is, as I have been saying for weeks, the greatest threat in the world today, bought and paid for by your Republican party, through eight years of inaction and out and out collaboration with a vicious military dictator.

Meanwhile, we need to spend our time on Obama's handshake, and the horror of the (Bush ordered) right wing terror report, and socialism and all manner of other nonsensical Republican misinformation.

Keep your eyes on this one. This is a ride that's just beginning.

The Lighter Side of World Disaster

From the New York Times:

"(Taliban) spokesman, Haji Muslim Khan..... said that Pakistan’s Prime Minister, Yousaf Raza Gilani, “should think about Western white women who take up arms and come from 20,000 miles away to fight against us here.”

Yup, that's their problem, all right.

John McCain- Still a Lying Partisan

From Politico today, this sickening piece of malice from the Man who Would Be President:

"The former GOP presidential nominee and POW....... insisted that those who gave legal advice should not be prosecuted because they were “sworn to do their duty to the best of their ability.”

Let me get this straight, John. They swore to do their duty, and then didn't do it, issuing patently fallacious and morally hateful "opinions." So this makes them less culpable than if they had not sworn to do their duty?
It's okay that they acted criminally because they swore not to act criminally?

What kind of twisted, sick logic is this?

"McCain compared the potential prosecutions with the actions of “banana republics”

Listen, you pathetic excuse for a human being, banana republics torture people. They don't prosecute those responsible for the torture; in fact they say it was just fine. Don't you get that? It's you guys who nearly turned this country into a banana republic. Now you want us to just forget about it. No thanks, buster.

God, we missed a bullet when this guy lost last November.

Thursday, April 23, 2009

MEGASTUPIDITY ALERT

ALERT! ALERT! ALERT!

Thanks to the ever observant Rachel Maddow, we are proud to bring you news of a truly monumental moment in the world annals of stupidity.

From Politico:

"A conservative faction of the Republican National Committee is urging the GOP to take a harder line against both Democrats and wayward Republicans, drafting a resolution to rename the opposition the “Democrat Socialist Party”

The resolution, proposed by a committeeman from Washington state, was agreed upon by 16 RNC members from 16 different states...."

Can any normal person peer into a mind addled to the point that its owner believes he has the right to rename the other party? What a great campaign advantage it would be if you could give your opponents a really hateful name. Maybe that would work, yeah? All you need to do is find a way to get everyone in the country to start using your name. This is truly a new high in the substitution of sheer lunacy for constructive participation in the political process. How can the Democrats even deal with people who think their role includes this kind of malicious nonsense?

Oh well, I'm game. No one ever accused me of a shortage of political malice. So here go a couple of my suggestions for renaming their party: Maybe the Republifuehrers. Or how about the Mussolinicans. Or maybe the Zimbabwican Party. I'm not sure I've got there yet- any suggestions?

I have to add in little letters that, as much right wing stupidity as I have seen (and as you may be able to tell, I've seen a lot), this has left me totally stunned. Believe me, I will keep my eyes on this. It is mental deficiency too colossal to be forgotten.

Run Out of Money

From an ad at Atlas Shrugs:

"The problem with Socialism is that you eventually run out of other people's money."

Ha ha ha. These days, it looks like that's the problem with capitalism too.

Birth Certificate

In case you are wondering how serious right wingers are about addressing the problems our country is facing, you might want to note that today, on World Net Daily, one of the oldest and most influential right wing websites, five of the top six stories are about Barack Obama's birth certificate.

Oh, and if you scroll down a little, you will find an article about how the Oklahoma City bombing was the work of Islamic terrorists with aid from Saddam.

Heads I Win....

Those of you who follow this kind of thing may be aware that Republicans have, for the last year or so been blaring the claim that Obama will reinstate the so-called "fairness doctrine" on radio and TV stations as a way of silencing conservative talk radio.

Now this, from The American Spectator:

"So when the Senate recently voted 87-11 in favor of an amendment prohibiting reinstatement of the Fairness Doctrine, with obvious White House approval resulting in the support of all those Senate Democrats, I immediately started looking for the other shoe to drop. What is the real plan to shut down conservative talk radio and Christian broadcasts? Where is Obama hiding the peanut this time?"

That peanut seems to be hidden in something that the author identifies as "local Soviet Councils," which he fears Obama will establish to control the radio stations. After a long list of "then Obama could do this" and "then Obama could do that," this painfully disingenuous person adds the following:

"The term "Soviet" as in "Union of Soviet Socialist Republics" referred to local councils "in the early political organization of the Russian Revolution in 1917," the dictionary tells us. Maybe these local "advisory" boards will serve a similar function in regard to radio stations."

Maybe. Maybe Obama will actually appoint ex-East German prison guards to run the radio stations. Maybe he will staff Conservative shows with Martian engineers whose lightning fast reflexes will allow them to instantly delete every word of conservative opposition. Maybe he'll just send tanks to blow the conservative radio stations to smithereens.

God. Even when Congress votes to give these pathetic people exactly what they have been demanding, they have to try to twist it into an act of abominable evil.

You just can't win.

You Learn Something Every Day

I was perusing what has become one of my favorite sites for things to ridicule, Renew America, when I learned about the "Black Value System," which I had never heard of. Apparently, this has something to do with Reverend Wright's church (remember him?) and therefore presumably with Barack Obama. Here is a little of what they had to say:

"Obama became a member of the Trinity United Church of Christ in Chicago in 1991. Part of becoming a member included a pledge of allegiance to the Black Value System, which translates into using non-biblical ethics written by blacks, for blacks. The teachings are Marxist, and have no resemblance to those of mainline Christian denominations that are scripturally sound."

This got my attention, as I am really not that interested in having a Marxist President. A couple of minutes with teh Google enabled me to find the following list of principles which make up the Black Value System:


1. Commitment to God
2. Commitment to the Black Community
3. Commitment to the Black Family
4. Dedication to the Pursuit of Education
5. Dedication to the Pursuit of Excellence
6. Adherence to the Black Work Ethic
7. Commitment to Self-Discipline and Self-Respect
8. Disavowal of the Pursuit of “Middleclassness”
9. Pledge to make the fruits of all developing and acquired skills available to the Black Community
10. Pledge to Allocate Regularly, a Portion of Personal Resources for Strengthening and Supporting Black Institutions
11. Pledge allegiance to all Black leadership who espouse and embrace the Black Value System
12. Personal commitment to embracement of the Black Value System.

I am so interested in this. I never really knew that a commitment to God, community, family, education and the work ethic were Marxist, with no resemblance to any Christian teachings.

Now that I think about it, maybe a Marxist President wouldn't be so bad.

Pammy Asks, I Answer

I'm developing such a close relationship with little Pammy Geller. I don't know how long this can last, with our passions running so high.

Today Pammy asks the following serious question:

"WHY WOULD OBAMA RELEASE GITMO ISLAMIC TERRORISTS ONTO OUR STREETS?"

Here's Pammy's cute answer:

"These are the acts of an enemy, a hater of America"

Here's another answer, Pammy:

Recognize that?

Pammy, just for your information, keeping a person locked up for years without charges or access to the supposed evidence against them or an attorney, does not constitute a speedy and public trial by an impartial jury. Nor does it constitute being informed of the nature and cause of the accusation. Nor does it involve being confronted with the witnesses against him, nor of being able to call witnesses in his defense, nor having the assistance of counsel.

In brief, the Bush administration's treatment of these people has violated virtually all of their constitutional protections, and has rendered it impossible, in a nation of laws, to convict them of anything, no matter how abominable they may actually be.

And this does not even begin to deal with the torture issue.

In short, it is the sole and total responsibility of the Bush administration, that there is no legal way to hold these people to account; and it is the sole and total responsibility of the Bush administration for any evil acts they get up to in the future.

Wingnu Lies- One More Chapter

This is a little long, but here are some excerpts from an article at Red State which demonstrates a particularly virulent brand of wingnut viciousness. I want to say once again, that I am bringing these things to you not merely for entertainment, but because it really is necessary for us to be aware of the magnitude of their derangement and hatred.

"Obama Dems: Doing for free what enemies would pay them to do

Would Usama bin Laden and KSM (who gave up intel that saved LA from its 911 thanks to waterboarding), Iran’s Mullahs and MembersOnlyJacket-ijad, and Kim Jung Il prefer that CIA agents fear prosecution by succeeding administrations for the carrying out of lawfully given interrogation orders?

...this penchant....for leftist Democrats to do the bidding (see aiding and abetting) for our enemies, albeit without “adhering”, isn’t new, as in:

1) John Kerry’s trip to Paris to conspire with the Communist North Vietnamese;
2) The Church Commission’s decimation of the CIA and the Democratic Party majority’s abandonment of the then victorious South Vietnamese;
3) Sen. Ted Kennedy’s then secret attempted sabotage with the KGB of President Reagan’s strategies to defeat the Soviet Union;
4) Kerry and other Democrats’ public support for the Communist Sandinistas in Nicaragua while President Reagan was supporting the freedom fighting Contras;
5) Preventing, since 1978, the expansion of domestic oil exploration and recovery as well as the building of any new oil refineries and nuclear power plants; and, most recently
6) The aggression-inviting weakness of the 2003-2009 Bushlied Democrats that prolonged the Iraq War and cost more American lives by emboldening our enemies to fight on ’till their party took control of the Executive branch;


The Democrats cost the United States victory in the Vietnam War....

And President Bush, the GOP and a remnant of JFK Dems won the Iraq War, for all intents and purposes, and even Obama seems content to let stand…so far.

But that same Obama is gutting the Defense budget...."

Okay, here goes.

1. Khalid Sheikh Mohammed was not waterboarded until a year after the alleged Los Angeles skyscraper bombing was supposed to take place, which renders it unlikely that it was his waterboarding that saved us. Incidentally, the plot itself is as much a figment of the imagination as most of Dick Cheney's allegations about Muslim terrorists.

2. Lawfully given orders? Sorry guy, but orders to engage in illegal acts are not "lawfully given." And by the way, where did I hear that "I was just following orders" thing? Oh yeah, it was from Nazis after World War II. It didn't fly then, and it doesn't fly now.

3. "...this penchant....for leftist Democrats to do the bidding (see aiding and abetting)" Ahh yes, those Democrats are nothing but traitors, right?

4.Now, how about those great historic examples of Democratic treason?

John Kerry conspired with the Communist North Vietnamese? A patent, malicious lie.

The Democratic Party abandoned the "victorious" South Vietnamese? By the end of the war, our allies controlled only a few square miles of the country of Vietnam, and despite our providing them with billions of dollars of illegal military aid, had been beaten within an inch of their lives. The notion that we were winning in Vietnam is nothing but Republican propaganda.

Senator Ted Kennedy collaborated with the KGB to sabotage our country? This is so laughabe that it doesn't even deserve a reply.

Kerry supporting the Sandinistas? The Republicans want us to forget that the Sandinistas were the legal govwernment of Nicaragua, elected in an internationally monitored fair election. The Contras were a terrorist army, financed by Reagan in direct defiance of the law of the United States, which forbade our government from aiding them. To get around this law, Reagan raised money by illegally selling 2000 missiles to the mullahs in Iran (yes, you read that right.) Talk about giving aid to our enemies.

Preventing the Oil companies from making more profits at the expense of our environment? That is collaborating with our enemies? Actually, this is probably the most revealing thing in this whole article. It sure puts out in the open whose interest the right is really promoting.

The Democrats emboldened our enemies in Iraq? This is so stupid that I will only respond to it by pointing out that there would have been no enemies in Iraq if Bush had not done everything he could to create them.

5. The Democrats caused our defeat in Vietnam? See above for a response to this tired lie.

6. Obama is "gutting" the defense budget? No, he is raising the defense budget, and you know it damned well.

This article is a perfect selection of the lies, smears and distortions that make up the Republicans' stock in trade. It's a shame to have to waste time refuting them in detail; however it is this kind of manipulation of history, along with similar things like the myth of the great Saint Ronnie, or the notion that George W. Bush was actually elected in 2000, that allow them to spread their poison. Democratic failure to stand up to these abominable myths has cost us so much. Let's not let it happen again.