Tag Archives: California governorship

Win some, lose some

Posted November 2, 2010, 10:50 p.m.

John Boehner

Associated Press photo

You say Boehner, I say blogging material: Anyway, here Repugnican U.S. Rep. John Boehner’s steel-cold blue eyes well up with tears as he ponders how he’ll abuse his new-found power to further help the filthy rich at the expense of the dipshits who actually believe that the Repugnicans actually care about them (and also at the expense of the rest of us).

Tonight’s election results turned out to be what I’d expected: A win for Democratic Governor-Elect Jerry Brown and for Democratic U.S. Sen. Barbara Boxer here in my home state of California, a ref — er, a repudiation of Repugnican millionaires and billionaires who want to buy office, at least here on the Left Coast.

I had expected Proposition 19, which would have legalized the use of marijuana here in California, to fail, as polls had predicted that it would. (Marijuana, like same-sex marriage, will be legal in all 50 states one day; we just have to wait for a lot of old fucks to kick off and take their stodgy, outdated beliefs with them to their graves.)

I had expected Proposition 23, Big Oil’s attempt to hamstring the fight against climate change in California, to fail, and it did, enabling California to remain at the forefront of combatting climate change.

And last but not least, I had expected the Democrats to lose some seats in the U.S. Senate but to retain their majority, and I had expected the Democrats to lose control of the U.S. House of Representatives.

The upshot of the Repugnicans winning control of the House is that (1) I’ll have plenty of blogging material for the next two years, as Repugnican Ohio Rep. John Boehner, to me, with those icy cold blue eyes of his (I have blue eyes also, but mine are warm blue eyes, thank you very much), is Evil Incarnate, and (2) the Repugnicans in the House certainly won’t be able to fix the nation’s economy, any more than the same surgeon who botched your operation is the one to fix the damage that he created, and therefore I expect that in 2012 the Democrats will regain the House after the fickle voters swing back to the Dems, and that the Dems will keep the White House, as well as make up for at least some of today’s losses in the Senate. 

In politics, you rarely get everything you want.

Today, in politics we got most of what I wanted — and, I daresay, now the Democrats will fare better in 2012 than they would have had they retained control of the House of Representatives today.

Advertisements

Leave a comment

Filed under Uncategorized

Nutmeg lies about her poll numbers

PollMemo_new

The gubernatorial campaign of Repugnican Nutmeg Whitman put out these bogus poll numbers in an e-mail to the campaign’s supporters today, showing how much contempt Team Nutmeg has for its own supporters. (Graphic copied and pasted from the actual e-mail from the Megalomaniac Whitman campaign.)

Nutmeg Whitman is a fucking liar.

Reputable polling organizations recently have put her Democratic challenger Jerry Brown anywhere from 8 percent (a Public Policy Institute of California [PPIC] poll) to 13 percent (a Los Angeles Times/USC poll) ahead of her, with yet another recent poll (a Field Poll released yesterday) putting Brown at 10 percent ahead of Nutmeg.

It’s safe to say that Brown’s lead is in the high single digits to low double digits, yet Team Whitman sent out an e-mail today (yes, I’m on the enemy’s e-mail list) that states:

In a survey conducted by Hill Research Consultants among 604 likely voters on October 26th and 27th, the race for governor is tied 43% Whitman to 43% Brown…. In a separate McLaughlin & Associates survey conducted among 900 likely voters on October 25th, 26th and 27th (300 each night), Meg Whitman has a slight lead over Jerry Brown 44% to 43%…. This neck and neck race represents a marked improvement for Meg Whitman….

Hill Research Consultants? McLaughlin & Associates?

OK, if these poll numbers are accurate, how come no poll that wasn’t purchased by billionaire bitch Nutmeg shows a “neck and neck” gubernatorial race? Why do only the Team Nutmeg polls shows this to be the case?

Megalomaniac Whitman wanted better poll numbers and so she simply bought them.

She and her henchpeople apparently didn’t want their supporters to become dispirited and perhaps not vote, so they decided to just lie about how well Megalomaniac actually is faring against her opponent. 

With such blatant fabrications now, one must wonder what Queen Nutmeg would do were she actually to gain major political office.

But Nutmeg Whitman will find out on Tuesday that, despite her billions, the governorship of California cannot be bought.

Practice saying “California Governor Jerry Brown.”

Leave a comment

Filed under Uncategorized

Nutmeg Whitman is NOT a whore

Meg Whitman

Associated Press photo

Whores, you see, have to work for their money. And they don’t have that much money, because most of their money goes to their pimps.

Repugnican billionaire Nutmeg Whitman has pumped more than $119 million of her own money into trying to buy California’s governor’s seat. And how did she become a billionaire? By having been a corporate pimp — by profiting filthily from the labor of underpaid corporate prostitutes and from corporate johns (that is, overcharged consumers).

If we don’t mean that Megalomaniac Whitman is a whore literally, well, then, how could a woman who is that unattractive really be a slut?

No, it’s just not accurate to call Nutmeg Whitman a whore. A bitch, yes. A whore, no.

But, if you are a member of Team Nutmeg, and the Los Angeles Times, the San Francisco Chronicle and the Sacramento Bee all have endorsed your Democratic opponent, Jerry Brown, and you still are reeling from Maidgate, then yeah, you try to make a big fucking deal about the fact that some Brown campaign underling was caught on tape calling Nutmeg Whitman a “whore.”

For the feminazis out there who go apoplectic over the use of the word “whore” (or “bitch” or “cunt” or the like), the words “prick” and “dick” to describe a male asshole aren’t considered to be sexist, so why is “whore” or “bitch” considered sexist? “Whore” or “bitch” (or even “cunt”) is just an epithet for a woman you don’t like. The use of such an epithet against a certain woman usually means that you don’t like that particular woman — not that you hate all women.

And for the Repugnicans to try to play the sexism card, when virtually all female Repugnican politicians and political candidates oppose a woman’s right to choose what she may and may not do with her own uterus, is beyond insanely hypocritical.

In any event, I’m not worried whatsofuckingever about someone calling Nutmeg Whitman a “whore.”

I’m worried about what would happen to the great state of California were that billionaire bitch actually to succeed in getting her greedy grubbies on the wheel of the ship of state.

And if you are a fellow Californian, you should be, too.

2 Comments

Filed under Uncategorized