Tag Archives: lying liars

Asshole Jimmy Kimmel’s pathetic, unfunny cry for attention

Jimmy Kimmel admits 'Twerking Fail' video was a hoax

Jimmy Kimmel | Photo Credits: ABC

ABC images

Jimmy Kimmel recently admitted that he violated your trust by having blatantly lied to you. Ha! Ha! Ha! That’s so funny!

I was one of the millions who viewed via the Internet the viral video of a young woman apparently practicing her “twerking” while home alone before, apparently, her female roommate or friend or relative arrives and forces open the front door (against which the first woman has been “twerking”), causing the “twerking” woman to fall onto a coffee table ablaze with several candles, and then, catch on fire.

The video did strike me as odd: Why the fuck would the second woman force the front door open like she apparently did when it was fairly clear that, for whatever strange reason, the first woman was upside down, up against the door? Is she that clueless and/or that bitchy that she would do that? And didn’t the “twerking” woman, albeit on fire, recover fairly easily from her body-slam onto the glass coffee table?

The viral video’s actual origin — a stunt pulled by “Jimmy Kimmel Live,” using a stuntwoman — explains all of that.

But it eludes me as to what, exactly, Kimmel & Co. were trying to accomplish by having released the fake video into cyberspace.

“Ha! We lied to you! Don’t you feel stupid?”

Was that the point?

Because it’s not especially clever or funny to post a fake video like this one online. It’s just another form of lying.

True, as this Associated Press article points out, we probably trust viral videos’ authenticity more readily than we should, and just because something has gone viral doesn’t mean that it’s authentic.

Certain videos purporting to capture victims of nerve gas in Syria at the hands of the Syrian government come to mind. Even if such videos weren’t faked, even if the victims were indeed nerve-gassed, the videos themselves of course don’t tell us who perpetrated the gas attack, yet the United States apparently just almost went to war based largely upon some fucking YouTube videos.

What would posterity have called that? The YouTube War?

I doubt that Kimmel & Co. were thinking of the Syrian videos when they pulled their stunt, of course.

Most likely, it seems to me, it was just a cry for attention, a juvenile publicity stunt.

I’ve never watched “Jimmy Kimmel Live,” but I have even less reason to do so now. The man’s just a liar, and that’s not clever or funny, and when one is lied to, he or she is not the defective one if he or she partially or wholly believed the lie.

It’s the liarnot the liar’s victims — who is the fucking asshole, and Jimmy Kimmel is a liar and therefore just another fucking asshole.

Leave a comment

Filed under Uncategorized

Freeloaders comprise Mittens’ base — not Barack Obama’s

Reactions mixed to secretly-taped comments at Romney fundraiser

Better than a sex tape: Repugnican Tea Party presidential wannabe Mittens Romney helpfully explains to (potential) rich, right-wing donors in May that the supporters of Barack Obama are “dependent upon government” and “pay no income tax,” even though the majority of the states that Mittens is likely to carry in November pay less in taxes than they get back from the federal government, essentially making them welfare states that are dependent upon the blue states.

Mittens Romney has it half-correct in the now-infamous, secretly taken video of him talking to his Richie Rich donors in May.

Indeed, recent polls show that Barack Obama right now has the support of about 47 percent to 50 percent of the nation’s voters — and that Mittens has the support of around 45 percent.

In the hidden video of him talking to (potential) donors on May 17, which has been brought to light by Mother Jones magazine, Romney said:

“There are 47 percent of the [American] people who will vote for the president no matter what. All right, there are 47 percent who are with him, who are dependent upon government, who believe that they are victims, who believe the government has a responsibility to care for them, who believe that they are entitled to health care, to food, to housing, to you name it.

“That that’s an entitlement. And the government should give it to them. And they will vote for this president no matter what… These are people who pay no income tax. …

“[M]y job is is not to worry about those people. I’ll  never convince them they should take personal responsibility and care for their lives.”

It’s probably true that there is nothing that any 2012 Repugnican Tea Party presidential candidate could have done or could do to cut significantly into the fairly solid support that President Barack Obama has, which indeed sits around 47 percent to 50 percent, at least somewhere in the upper 40s.

It’s also probably true that there’s nothing that Obama could do to cut deeply into Mittens’ about-45-percent support. These 45 or so percent are largely (not entirely, I suppose, but mostly) white supremacists who wouldn’t vote for Obama because he’s black.

It’s also true that Obama shouldn’t worry, and in his first term thus far he should not have worried, about getting the support of these racist, white-supremacist haters whose support he never was going to get anyway because of the color of his skin. Obama thus far into his first term should have focused instead upon delivering for his base.

Had he done so, we would see a lot more enthusiasm for Obama’s re-election than we do now. A progressive agenda, instead of a “bipartisan,” Repugnican-Tea-Party-and-corporate-ass-licking agenda, would have resulted in the change that Obama relentlessly promised.

It strikes me that Obama is doing as well in the polls as he is now only because Mittens Romney is such a fucking catastrophe as a presidential candidate. Being a multi-millionaire and a Mormon, both of which demographics make him very unlike the average American voter, Mittens really has needed to be likeable. But call that strike three: multi-millionaire, Mormon and unlikeable.

Mittens very most likely is out.

Which brings me back to the secret video that Mother Jones brought to light.

In the video, Mittens repeats the relentless right-wing lie that the denizens of the blue states are lazy parasites “who are dependent upon government, who believe that they are victims, who believe the government has a responsibility to care for them” and “who pay no income tax.”

That last part is really fucking funny, because Mother Jones — to which I probably am going to subscribe, since the magazine apparently just brought down Mittens Romney’s presidential campaign — in February of this year also published an article on how the red states still are sucking the blood of the blue states in terms of how much the states get back from the federal government in comparison to how much money they put into the federal government. (I wrote about this phenomenon way back in April 2009. My figures at that time were from 2005.)

Per Mother Jones, from 2010 figures, these are the top 10 states in terms of how much they get back from the federal government for every $1.00 that they put into the federal government:

1. New Mexico: $2.63

2. West Virginia: $2.57

3. Mississippi: $2.47

4. Hawaii: $2.38

5. Alabama: $2.03

6. Alaska: $1.93

7. Montana: $1.92

8. South Carolina: $1.92

9. Maine: $1.78

10. Kentucky: $1.75

My home state of California gets only 87 cents per dollar. The other blue-state powerhouse, New York, gets only 72 cents per dollar.

The writer of the February 2012 Mother Jones article concludes that:

  • “Most politically ‘red’ states are financially in the red when it comes to how much money they receive from Washington compared with what their residents pay in taxes” and that
  • “The states that contributed more in taxes than they got back in spending were more likely to have voted for Obama in 2008 and were more likely to be largely urban” and that
  • “Of the 22 states that went to [John] McCain in 2008, 86 percent received more federal spending than they paid in taxes in 2010. In contrast, 55 percent of the states that went to Obama received more federal spending than they paid in taxes. Republican states, on average, received $1.46 in federal spending for every tax dollar paid; Democratic states, on average, received $1.16.” [Emphasis mine.]

So it’s not just that Mittens Romney has insulted about half of the American electorate by deeming us “dependent upon government” and possessing an outsized sense of “entitlement” — by calling us, in essence, lazy freeloaders.

It’s also that he’s a motherfucking liar, and that the true freeloaders in the United States of America live the in the majority of the states that Mittens is most likely to carry in November.

Fucking freeloaders are Mittens Romney’s base, not Barack Obama’s.

It is those of us in the blue states who are carrying the red-state parasites, who have the audacity to call us blue-staters the parasites.

If the red-staters believe that they have it so bad, we should let them secede.

I am one Californian who is beyond sick and fucking tired of subsidizing the welfare kings and queens of the red states who enjoy their entitlements while they call us blue-staters who make their entitlements possible the lazy socialists who want something for nothing.

Leave a comment

Filed under Uncategorized

‘Vast majority’ of ’08 donors haven’t ponied up for Obama’s re-election bid

The New York Times ran an interesting article yesterday that reports that “a vast majority of [President Barack] Obama’s past donors, who number close to four million, have not yet given him any money at all [for his re-election bid].”

Wow.

The Times also reports that

Through June 30, the close of the most recent campaign reporting period, more than 552,000 people had contributed to Mr. Obama’s re-election effort, according to campaign officials. Half of them were new donors, and nearly all of them gave contributions of less than $250.

This doesn’t require a shitload of analysis — just a little bit of awareness. Obama burned those to whom he repeatedly had promised “hope” and “change,” and, according to the Times, about half of his current donors are newbies. (I surmise that they haven’t been paying much attention since Obama was inaugurated in January 2009, and/or the specter of a President Perry or President Romney “inspired” them to give money to Obama, even though he hasn’t delivered upon his much-hyped promises of “hope” and “change.”)

We see this in our daily lives: Those who go around burning people always have to obtain fresh victims to burn.

Only now that his re-election looks less likely over time has Obama promised to be the president that he’d promised us back in 2007 and 2008 that he’d be. He now promises, in his third year in office, to finally do something significant about unemployment and he now promises to make the rich and the super-rich pay their fair share of taxes, even though it was only in December that he allowed the Bush tax cuts for the rich and the super-rich to continue for another two years, violating yet another of his campaign promises.

Meh. I don’t believe him. I don’t believe that Obama would do much more, if anything more, in a second term than he has done thus far.

I think that he’d say anything to get re-elected, but the millions of us who haven’t given him another penny since the 2008 cycle — yes, that includes me — recognize his false promises as the false promises that they are.

Obama’s only hope for re-election that I can see is that the fear of a President Perry or a President Romney “inspires” former supporters to pony up and/or to vote for him again.

But that’s not a strong re-election slogan: “Re-elect Barack Obama: He’s Not As Bad As the Other Guy.”*

I surmise that more people voted against George W. Bush in 2004 than who voted for John Kerry — that is, their fear of a second term of the unelected Bush regime was greater than was their enthusiasm for Kerry.

The calcified (well, calcified except where it needs to be calcified: its spine) Democratic Party establishment sorely needs to go back to the drawing board and ask itself if it wants to return, ever, to the progressive policies and the willingness to fight tooth and nail for those policies, as was the case for the party’s leaders in the distant past, or whether it is safe for the party’s continued existence for its leaders to continue to believe that it’s enough to only continue to point out to the voters that the Repugnican (Tea) Party candidate is even worse than is the Democratic candidate.

I, for one, am willing to suffer through another Repugnican presidency if that would mean that the Democratic Party finally got its fucking shit together and stopped expecting us to expect nothing in return for our money and our votes.

But I don’t think that I’m alone. Apparently, thus far, anyway, at least a few million others are with me.

*If you think that I’m exaggerating, you should read this Associated Press news article from today:

Seattle — President Barack Obama charged [today] that the GOP vision of government would “fundamentally cripple America,” as he tried out his newly combative message on the liberal West Coast.

Aiming to renew the ardor of Democratic loyalists who have grown increasingly disenchanted with him, the president mixed frontal attacks on Republicans with words of encouragement intended to buck up the faithful as the 2012 campaign revs up.

“From the moment I took office what we’ve seen is a constant ideological pushback against any kind of sensible reforms that would make our economy work better and give people more opportunity,” the president said at an intimate brunch fundraiser at the Medina, Wash., home of former Microsoft executive Jon Shirley.

About 65 guests were paying $35,800 per couple to listen to Obama at the first of seven fundraisers he was holding from Seattle to Hollywood to San Diego [today and tomorrow]. The three-day West Coast swing, ending Tuesday in Denver, offered him the chance to re-engage with some of his most liberal and deep-pocketed supporters. … [Entire article is here.]

This really does appear to be Obama’s “argument” for re-election: “If you think that I’m bad…”

That’s an incredibly weak, deeply uninspiring talking point.

Leave a comment

Filed under Uncategorized

Repugnican Tea Party’s recipe for hell on earth: More babies, more warming

Vice President Joe Biden is under attack again from the Repugnican Tea Party traitors, this time for apparently having voiced his support of China’s one-child policy.

What would the Repugnican Tea Party traitors do without Joe Biden? Biden is known for saying impolitical things, and while former veep Dick Cheney should be executed for his war crimes and his crimes against humanity (as should George W. Bush, Condoleezza Rice, et. al.), the “tea party” traitors’ bullshit line is the President Barack Obama (somehow) is responsible for everything that Biden says and does.

What I take Biden’s reported statement to mean is that he’s understands that China’s government decided to limit the nation’s population growth. However, China allegedly has “coercive birth limitation policies, including forced abortion and sterilization,” which Biden opposes, according to a statement issued by Biden’s office.

Of course, the Repugnican Tea Party traitors have been all over this, insinuating that Biden endorses everything that the Chinese government does. Reports Yahoo! News:

“China’s one-child policy is gruesome and barbaric,” former Massachusetts Gov. Mitt Romney, a 2012 contender, said Tuesday in a statement. “Instead of condoning the policy, Vice President Biden should have condemned it in the strongest possible terms. There can be no defense of a government that engages in compulsory sterilization and forced abortions in the name of population control.”

“China’s one-child policy has led to the great human tragedy of forced abortions throughout China, and Vice President Biden’s refusal to ‘second-guess’ this horrendous policy demonstrates great moral indifference on the part of the Obama Administration,” presidential candidate Rick Perry, governor of Texas, said in a statement Tuesday. “Americans value life, and we deserve leaders who will stand up against such inhumanity, not cast a blind eye.”

So Joe Biden is a baby killer, you see, and by extension, so is Barack Obama.

Of course, as the American empire continues to collapse, with talk of Social Security and Medicare being wiped out because there are too many Americans to take care of, now would be a great time for the United States of America to seriously begin to consider reining in its own population growth.

Do I advocate forced sterilization or forced abortions? Of course not. And neither does Joe Biden (or Barack Obama or anyone else within the Democratic Party high command), which fucking liars Mitt Romney and Rick Perry — who call themselves “Christians” despite their blatant fucking lies — both fucking know.

Of course, Perry and Romney and their ilk are just pandering to the mouth-breathers’ belief that it’s a swell idea to keep popping out the puppies, whether we are taking care of these puppies or not, and are putting out there the blatant lie that if re-elected, Barack Obama will initiate forced abortions and forced sterilizations! And the Repugnican Tea Party’s base of ignorant, fearful fucktards will believe it — after all, Mitt Romney and Rick Perry said it!

What would be responsible public policy, however, would be for the government to pay for voluntary sterilization. After all, it would be much less expensive for all of us taxpayers to pay for one sterilization procedure than to have to pay for another human being (public school expenses, health care expenses, infrastructure expenses due to population growth, Social Security, etc.).

However, the key is voluntary. Nothing forced.

A sane, responsible population of people that isn’t incredibly stupidly hell-bent on its own fucking destruction keeps itself in check, under control. 

Not only is our economy collapsing, due mostly to the plutocrats’ treasonous greed, of course — we have plenty of wealth in the United States; it’s that our wealth has been stolen from us since the Reagan years through a thousand cuts and has been concentrated in the treasonous hands of the plutocratic few, who enjoy the protection of the treasonous Repugnican Tea Party — but let’s face it, the more individuals we have using our resources, the faster our resources are depleted, and the planet suffers, too, such as with increased global warming from the increased use of fossil fuels from the increase in the number of consumers of fossil fuels.

Of course, Romney and Perry and their ilk not only want Americans to keep popping out babies that we can’t take of, but they “don’t believe” in global warming, as though global warming weren’t science — which it is — but were something like the Tooth Fairy or Santa Claus or the Easter Bunny. Reports The Associated Press:

Bedford, N.H. — GOP presidential candidate Rick Perry told New Hampshire voters [last week] that he does not believe in manmade global warming, calling it a scientific theory that has not been proven.

“I think we’re seeing almost weekly, or even daily, scientists that are coming forward and questioning the original idea that manmade global warming is what is causing the climate to change,” the Texas governor said on the first stop of a two-day trip to the first-in-the-nation primary state.

He said some want billions or trillions of taxpayer dollars spent to address the issue, but he added: “I don’t think from my perspective that I want to be engaged in spending that much money on still a scientific theory that has not been proven and from my perspective is more and more being put into question.” …

It’s entirely untrue that global warming is just a theory that the world’s scientists aren’t agreed upon. There is virtually universal agreement among the world’s scientists that global warming is very real and is a serious problem.*

It’s that Rick Perry is the governor of Texas, Big Oil’s No. 1 state, and his campaign contributors, and his party’s campaign contributors, give Perry and his ilk an awful lot of money not to “believe” in global warming. The science, you see, as Al Gore put it, is inconvenient to those who profit obscenely, at our long-term expense, from continuing to destroy the planet via the use of fossil fuels — just as, as Gore also pointed out, the discovery that tobacco causes cancer sure rained on Big Tobacco’s parade of profiteering. (And, as Gore also pointed out, Big Tobacco tried to lie about the science about the harmful and even lethal effects of its products for as long as it could, just as Big Oil is doing now.) 

Now, the whole Texas secession thing aside, I view taking money from Big Oil in order to allow Big Oil to continue to harm us, the people, to amount to treason. A public servant is supposed to serve the people, not harm the people for selfish personal gain. Yet here is traitor Perry calling others traitors. That’s typical of the hypocrisy of the right wing, though, of course.

Not to be outdone by Perry, a week after Perry announced that he “doesn’t believe” in global warming, Romney pretty much did the same thing, saying, also in New Hampshire, “Do I think the world’s getting hotter? Yeah, I don’t know that but I think that it is. I don’t know if it’s mostly caused by humans. What I’m not willing to do is spend trillions of dollars on something I don’t know the answer to.”

Of course, the problem isn’t really the spending of trillions of dollars — after all, we blow that much money on bogus wars for the war profiteers. The problem is not allowing Big Oil to continue to profiteer from our demise because of our planet’s demise. Big Oil doesn’t want its big profits jeopardized, and its cronies within the treasonous Repugnican Tea Party care more about Big Oil’s continued obscene profits than they care about the welfare of the rest of us or our planet.

Only one of the Repugnican contenders, former Utah Gov. Jon Huntsman, who doesn’t have a snowball’s chance in hell of winning the 2012 Repugnican Tea Party presidential nomination because he is the sanest of the bunch of contenders, recently declared, “To be clear: I believe in evolution and trust scientists on global warming. Call me crazy.”** Oh, those of his ill-chosen party do.

But while one is entitled to his or her opinions, one is not entitled to his or her facts — whether one falsely claims that global warming is not a reality or falsely claims that Joe Biden (and other Dems) support forced abortions and/or forced sterilizations.

And the claim of the majority of the Repugnican Tea Party traitors that reality indeed is whatever they deem reality to be — all of that inconvenient science be damned — is the dictionary definition of the word “insanity,” which is a break from reality.

And the insanity of the likes of Mitt Romney and Rick Perry isn’t just their cute quirkiness. Their insanity threatens all of us and the entire planet, because in the most powerful political office of the United States of America, their insanity would be gargantuanly amplified.

A responsible leader leads us where we need to go, even if many or even most of us are are not thrilled about having to make the journey.

We need to keep our population in check. We clearly can’t take care of those who already are here in the United States, so why contribute to our national misery by popping out even more puppies?

We sure love our fossil fuels, but they’re killing us, as surely as a person with terminal lung cancer who still loves his or her cigarettes is only hastening his or her own demise.

Perry, Romney & Co. claim to care about life, but short-sighted policies that in the long run threaten all life on the planet aren’t what I’d call pro-life.

To support policies that guarantee continued runaway profiteering and personal political gain in the short term but that cause long-term damage to the nation and to the world isn’t just short-sighted, irresponsible and insane. It’s treasonous.

Based upon just the two critically important issues of population control and global warming alone, the choice for president in November 2012 should be pretty fucking crystal clear to those of us who are not absofuckinglutely insane.

*The Associated Press notes that “Perry’s opinion runs counter to the view held by an overwhelming majority of scientists that pollution released from the burning of fossil fuels is heating up the planet. Perry’s home state of Texas releases more heat-trapping pollution carbon dioxide — the chief greenhouse gas — than any other state in the country, according to government data.” (Emphasis mine.)

**Huntsman also recently stated: “The minute that the Republican Party becomes the … anti-science party, we have a huge problem…. When we take a position that isn’t willing to embrace evolution, when we take a position that basically runs counter to what 98 or 100 climate scientists have said … I think we find ourselves on the wrong side of science and, therefore, in a losing position.”

The only thing there I disagree with is that the Repugnican Tea Paty already is the anti-science party. It isn’t becoming the anti-science party.

Leave a comment

Filed under Uncategorized

The bin Laden assassination account du jour

OK, so first, we were told that Osama bin Laden was armed and posed an immediate threat to the U.S. Navy SEALs who shot him dead in Pakistan this past weekend.

Then, we were told that he wasn’t armed, but that nonetheless he still somehow was threatening to the SEALs — maybe he had a bomb* on him, even! (Of course, anyone could have a bomb hidden on [or in…] his or her body, so using that “logic,” it’s OK to shoot dead anyone.)

Now, we are being told that the SEALs had planned to kill bin Laden no matter what.

Reports Yahoo! News today:

The SEALs’ decision to fatally shoot bin Laden — even though he didn’t have a weapon — wasn’t an accident.  The administration had made clear to the military’s clandestine Joint Special Operations Command that it wanted bin Laden dead, according to a senior U.S. official with knowledge of the discussions.  A high-ranking military officer briefed on the assault said the SEALs knew their mission was not to take him alive.

Publicly, the White House insists it was prepared to capture bin Laden if he tried to surrender, a possibility senior officials described as remote.

John Brennan, the administration’s top counterterrorism official, told reporters on Monday if “we had the opportunity to take him alive, we would have done that.”A senior intelligence official echoed that sentiment in an interview [yesterday], telling National Journal that if bin Laden “had indicated surrender, he would have been captured.”

But bin Laden didn’t appear to have been given a chance to surrender himself to the SEALs.

“To be frank, I don’t think he had a lot of time to say anything,” CIA Director Leon Panetta said in an interview airing on “PBS NewsHour.”

There is a word for this kind of thing: Fuck.

One of my U.S. senators, Dianne Feinstein, who is chair of the U.S. Senate Intelligence Committee, has said that she was informed of the planning of the raid on the compound in Pakistan that held bin Laden in December.

In December.

One, if bin Laden (still) were such an imminent threat that he needed to be summarily executed on the spot, then why did it take the Obama administration that long to finally get him?

Two, since the Obama administration had bin Laden’s nabbing in the works at least since December, why the fuck has it been unable to get its fucking story straight?

I have as much confidence in the Obama administration as I did in the bumbling Bush regime.

This bullshit bungling is supposed to help Obama’s re-election campaign how?

*The Los Angeles Times reports:

After saying Monday that the American operatives who raided the Pakistani compound had orders to capture Bin Laden if he gave himself up, U.S. officials [yesterday] added an important qualifier: The assault force was told to accept a surrender only if it could be sure he didn’t have a bomb hidden under his clothing and posed no other danger.

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

Steele banks on Repugnican stupidity

Yesterday I called Repugnican National Committee head Michael Steele a liar.

I hadn’t planned to write more about his lies about this past weekend’s special election in Hawaii, but then today I got a fundraising e-mail in his name regarding Hawaii’s special election results, and the e-mail makes it clear that the Repugnican Party’s “leadership” has no problem whatsoever lying to its own supporters — especially if by lying to them the Repugnican Party’s “leaders” can get their dupes to give the party some money.

In an e-mail from the RNC (yes, I’m on the enemy’s e-mail list) titled “One Step Closer to Firing Nancy Pelosi,” which I received today, Steele (or his ghostwriter) writes:

Dear Robert,

This weekend, thanks to the generous support of RNC Sustaining Members like you [I’ve never given the Repugnican Party a single fucking penny in my entire life, so why the e-mail calls me a “sustaining member” I have no idea], Charles Djou was elected to the U.S. House in Hawaii’s 1st Congressional District.

The race was decided by only a few thousand votes. Democrats and liberal special interests were determined to keep this seat in Democrat hands — a seat they had held for nearly 20 years — and flooded the district with party operatives and millions of dollars in campaign cash.

Despite the Democrats’ tactics, the RNC’s voter contact and get-out-the-vote programs helped push our GOP candidate over the top. The RNC made roughly 70,000 voter contacts — phone calls and door knocks — to ensure Republicans and like-minded Independents voted for Charles Djou.

This victory is another step toward Republicans regaining a majority in the U.S. House, firing Nancy Pelosi as Speaker and putting our country back on the right path. But we can take nothing for granted. We must work harder than ever to ensure our candidates at all levels have the necessary resources to defeat the Democrats this fall.

Please help keep the momentum going. Your secure online contribution of $25, $50, $100 or $500 to the Republican National Committee today will help our Party stay on track to nationwide victories in the 2010 midterm elections.

With your continuing support, Robert, we will retake the U.S. House, reclaim the U.S. Senate and elect more Republican governors and state legislators in November. Thank you again for helping our Party win a historic victory in Hawaii, and moving us one step closer to firing Nancy Pelosi.

Sincerely,


Michael Steele
Chairman, Republican National Committee

P.S. Robert, Charles Djou’s victory in the special election to the U.S. House in Hawaii’s 1st Congressional District is another example that our Party can win anywhere in the country when we have a principled, conservative candidate backed by the RNC’s network of grassroots supporters. Help ensure our vital 2010 candidate support and party-building programs keep moving forward by making a secure online gift of $25, $50, $100 or $500 to the RNC today. Thank you.

Wow.

Nowhere in the e-mail does Steele divulge that Djou won less than 40 percent of the vote to the almost 60 percent of the vote that his two Democratic challengers won — thus, Steele’s implication that the U.S. House district in Hawaii has flipped Repugnican from Democrat due to the Repugnican Party’s hard work is bullshit.

Nor does Steele bother to tell us in the fundraising e-mail that Djou is expected to lose his new seat in November — when, according to The Christian Science Monitor, unlike was the case in this past weekend’s special election, only one Democratic candidate may run against Djou, who must run again in November if he wishes to try to keep his new seat.

So Djou has less than six months to turn his less-than-40-percent support into the kind of support that can fend off the around-60-percent Democratic support that was evident in this past weekend’s special election — in a district that historically has been Democratic.

It’s highly unfuckinglikely that Djou will be able to do that.

Thus, it’s highly unfuckinglikely that Djou will be able “[move the Repugnican Party] one step closer to firing Nancy Pelosi,” since come November his congressional district most likely will elect a Democrat to replace him.

So the tactic of the fundraising e-mail was to lie about what Djou’s weekend win really means, and then to raise the specter of — gaaaaah!Nancy Pelosi! — in order to get Repugnican Party supporters riled up enough to give the party money.

You know, if you have to lie to your supporters like that, your party is probably far, far more fucked than you’d ever let them know.

Because then, they most likely wouldn’t give you any money.

Leave a comment

Filed under Uncategorized