Tag Archives: Michael Steele

Only a Wayback Machine can save the Repugnican Tea Party now

The Repugnican Tea Party traitors should consider hiring Mr. Peabody as a consultant, and they’ll need to go back to even before 1900…

So the Repugnican Tea Party traitors’ talking point now is that in order to win over voters from now on, they have to communicate better.

Wow.

They’ve been communicating quite well, actually. Anyone who has been paying attention should be quite clear on where they have stood. Take the Repugnican Tea Party’s platform that was approved from its last national convention. This is Faux News reporting, too (in August):

Tampa, Fla. — Republicans emphatically approved a toughly worded party platform at their national convention Tuesday that would ban all  abortions and gay marriages, reshape Medicare into a voucher-like program and cut taxes to energize the economy and create jobs. …

There alone, the Repugnican Tea Party traitors alienated most women and almost all non-heterosexuals (there are some self-loathing non-heterosexuals who support the Repugnican Tea Party, but there aren’t a lot of them). There’s no way to “better” “communicate” such stances as that the embryo’s or fetus’ “rights” always trump those of the mother (even, very apparently, in such cases as rape, incest or when the mother’s life would be at risk should the pregnancy continue) or that the U.S. Constitution should be amended to ban same-sex marriage in all 50 states.

Those are the hard-right, misogynist, homophobic and patriarchal stances that the Repugnican Tea Party took in its latest party platform, which wasn’t passed nearly long enough ago for the fascistic traitors who comprise the party to claim now that they just didn’t “communicate” well enough.

It’s not just women and gays whom the Repugnican Tea Party traitors have alienated, of course.

Most of the traitors still are beating up on the brown-skinned immigrants from south of the border, whom they regard as subhuman, much as how the Nazis regarded the Jews and how the Israelis, ironically, now regard the Palestinians.

Ohioan “Joe the Plumber,” one of the poster boys for the stupid white man, who last year ran for a seat in the U.S. House of Representatives on the Repugnican Tea Party ticket (of course) declared in Arizona — Ground Zero for the anti-immigrant bigotry and hatred in the U.S.; indeed, Arizona is the South Africa of the Southwest — in August that the U.S. government should “put a damn fence on the border going with Mexico and start shooting.” Those were the words of a candidate for a federal office.

Let’s not leave out black Americans, of course.

A huge chunk of the Repugnican Tea Party traitors still maintain that Barack Obama was born in Kenya and thus his presidency is illegitimate — as though if there had been any problem with Obama’s constitutionally mandated qualifications to be president, neither Billary Clinton nor John McCainosaurus, who must have spent plenty of dough on opposition research and who both wanted to be president very badly, would have discovered it and then worked to oust Obama from the 2008 presidential race.

Michelle Obama can’t do anything without being criticized for it by the white-supremacist wingnuts as being un-first-lady-like. What if Laura Bush — or (shivers) First Lady Ann Romney — had announced the Oscar for Best Picture? Would the Repugnican Tea Party traitors have brayed that that was “inappropriate”?

Of course not — because their main problem with Barack Obama and his wife is that they’re blacks who are in the White House.

And even while we have some of the Repugnican Tea Party traitors claiming that they just need to “communicate” “better,” as I type this sentence we have most of the members of the Repugnican Tea Party publicly hoping that the right-wing-controlled U.S. Supreme Court will eviscerate the Voting Rights Act of 1965 — because despite the fact that the Repugnican Tea Party still advocates measures that keep blacks and other non-whites and other Democratically leaning individuals from voting, such as strict voter identification requirements (in the name of preventing the “voter fraud” that does not exist — that’s in their party platform, too) and insanely long voting lines for black, non-white and other Democratically leaning voters (coupled, of course, with short lines for Repugnican Tea Party voters), race-based voter suppression is a relic from the past, you see.

And if the Repugnican Tea Party traitors can’t suppress enough Democratically leaning voters, fuck it, they’ll just at least try to change the way that we divvy up the electoral votes in the Electoral College, but only in those states that will boost the Repugnican Tea Party. (We’ll leave Texas and the other dark-red states alone, you see.)

It’s clear that the Repugnican Tea Party traitors like, respect and support democracy only when they win/“win” elections. (The quotation marks are for such elections as the 2000 presidential election.) You can’t “communicate” that obvious fact “better.”

We also have Mittens Romney’s comment in October that “47 percent” of Americans are mooches, when, in fact, it’s the 47 percent who voted for Romney who are the takers, while the denizens of the blue states (the “47 percent” whom Romney was referring to) always have been and always will be the makers, supporting the welfare states that are the red states.

Muslims, too, have been bashed relentlessly by the Repugnican Tea Party — aside from advocating the continued mass slaughter of Muslims (such as by incredibly stupidly attacking Iran and by stupidly blindly continuing to support the mass-murderous wingnuts of Israel in their continued Nazi-like mass slaughter of the Palestinians), the Repugnican Tea Party traitors call President Obama a Muslim as a slam — and I can’t see most Muslims ever supporting the Repugnican Tea Party any more than I can see myself ever supporting the Repugnican Tea Party.

As a gay man, am I to just forget what the Repugnican Tea Party just put in its fucking party platform — that my equal human and civil rights guaranteed to me by the U.S. Constitution should be denied to me by an amendment to the U.S. Constitution that specifically singles me out for such discrimination? Am I to just forget that George W. Bush made opposition to same-sex marriage a centerpiece of his 2004 “re”-election campaign? (Speaking of Gee Dubya, am I also to just forget that he blatantly stole office in 2000 and then started a bogus war for which he should be executed as the war criminal that he is?) Am I to just forget that the House Repugnicans right now are spending millions of taxpayers’ dollars to try to keep the so-called “Defense of Marriage Act” alive because the Obama administration refuses to defend the blatantly unconstitutional — and thus the infuckingdefensible — act?

Are women just supposed to forget the Repugnican Tea Party traitors’ clearly articulated stances on such issues as abortion, birth control, rape and violence against women?

Are Latinos just supposed to forget the brown-skinned-immigrant bashing that the Repugnican Tea Party traitors have been using to induce ignorant, bigoted white voters to vote for them?

Are blacks just supposed to forget?

“We need to be asking for votes in the most powerful way possible, which is to have people asking for the vote who are comfortable and look like and sound like the people that we’re asking for the vote from,” Karl Rove (a.k.a. George W. “Bush’s brain”) said just yesterday just in my backyard, here in Sacramento, at the California Repugnican Tea Party traitors’ convention.

How has that tactic been working for the Repugnican Tea Party traitors, though?

They fronted Sarah Palin after Barack Obama had picked Joe Biden (and not Billary Clinton or another woman) to be his running mate. The message was supposed to be that the Repugnican Tea Party is the party that wuvs women.

Women didn’t buy it, and probably were insulted that the Repugnican Tea Party traitors think that they’re that fucking stupid. (I was thusly insulted, and I’m a male.) Despite Palin’s supposedly having demonstrated that the Repugnican Tea Party overnight magically became the party of and for women, Obama in November 2008 won a higher percentage of the popular vote than George W. Bush did in 2000 or in 2004, and he couldn’t have done that without women.

The Repugnican Tea Party traitors then put Michael Steele in charge of the Repugnican National Committee — as the first black head of the party, in obvious cynical response to the election of the nation’s first black president. (Steele, before he became the head of the party, had been only the lieutenant governor of Maryland. That’s how few blacks are in any real position of power within the Repugnican Tea Party.)

Although on Steele’s watch (from January 2009 to January 2011) the Repugnican Tea Party traitors won back the U.S. House of Representatives in 2010 (in the “tea party” “revolution”), the Repugnican Tea Party traitors nonetheless dumped Steele in January 2011 and replaced him with white frat boy Reince Priebus — the usual face of the party.

And although the Repugnican Tea Party traitors lost seats in the U.S. House of Representatives in 2012, on white frat boy Reince Priebus’ watch, just this past January the Repugnican Tea Party traitors nonetheless granted the stupid white man Priebus a second two-year term as head of the Repugnican Tea Party.

As George W. Bush amply demonstrated, the bar is set much, much, much lower for stupid white men than it is for anyone else, perhaps especially for blacks.

Now the Repugnican Tea Party traitors cynically are fronting younger Latino male candidates, such as U.S. Sen. Marco Rubio of Florida, as a presidential hopeful, and, here in California, Abel Maldonado as a gubernatorial hopeful.

Rubio is a 41-year-old Cuban American, and of course Cuban Americans, being (1) the rich Cubans who had exploited others for their own selfish gain before they had to escape from Fidel Castro’s anti-capitalist revolution or (2) their spoiled spawn (such as Rubio), predominantly are right-wingers who believe that the lighter-skinned should continue to exploit the darker-skinned.

Yet almost two-thirds of Latinos in the U.S. have Mexican roots and only 3.5 percent of them have Cuban roots. So how representative is Marco Fucking Rubio of the nationwide Latino community? (But he’s Latino — close enough, right? Is that not how the white supremacists think? Kind of like how 15 of the 19 9/11 hijackers were from Saudi Arabia and not one of them was from Iraq, but let’s invade Iraq because that’s close enough, right?)

Californian Repugnican Tea Party member Abel Maldonado is 45 years old, and while unlike Marco Rubio he is Mexican-American, he couldn’t win even the post of state controller in 2006 or lieutenant governor in 2010. And he ran for the U.S. House of Representatives last year but lost. And he is Californian Repugnicans’ Great Latino Hope.

When will the Repugnican Tea Party traitors realize that the voters can recognize a wolf in sheep’s clothing? Will Marco Rubio (and others who fit his demographic) magically work to win over Latino voters to the Repugnican Tea Party any more than Palin and Steele worked to win over women and black voters?

And is Karl Rove not blatantly asserting that appearance is all that matters when he advises his fellow Repugnican Tea Party traitors “to have people asking for the vote who are comfortable and look like and sound like the people that we’re asking for the vote from”?

Fuck substance, right? Fuck the Repugnican Tea Party’s continuing history of oppressing certain groups of people, right? Just put a right-wing sellout like Sarah Palin or Michael Steele or Marco Rubio out there and the voters won’t know the difference, right?

The Repugnican Tea Party traitors can find a wingnut or two (or maybe even three) among any minority group and front him or her or them as a candidate. It’s not nearly enough, though, to wipe out decades of the party’s bigotry and discrimination that not only is historical but still continues as I type this sentence.

Perhaps especially when the Repugnican Tea Party then blames its electoral losses on the tokens whom it once fronted and then replaces them with the traditional stupid white men (there was no Palin repeat in 2012 — no, it was two stupid white men on the Repugnican Tea Party presidential ticket, the way that it always had been pre-Palin, and, as I noted, Reince Priebus kept his job as the party’s head even though the booted Michael Steele apparently had done a better job than Priebus did) the party loses even more ground with the groups whose votes it claimed it wanted. You won’t score points with these groups by turning your tokens into your scapegoats.

Even Mittens Romney, for fuck’s sake, reportedly has manned up enough to blame his campaign for his loss in November.

“I lost my election because of my campaign, not because of what anyone else did,” Romney reportedly said on Faux News today.

However, while Romney reportedly quite correctly identified his “47 percent” remarks as being damaging to his campaign — insulting almost half of the nation’s voters on video isn’t a great idea — he also reportedly attributed his loss to the loss of black and Latino voters.

As much as I don’t want to defend Mittens Romney, who would have been a disastrous president, the fact is that there was nothing that his campaign could have done to win over black and Latino voters, given his own fucking party’s disastrous historical relations with those groups.

Actually, I guess that I’m not defending Mittens, because his apparent belief that there was anything that he could have done to magically win over black and Latino voters demonstrates, I think, how stupid he and his ilk believe black and Latino voters are, and how superiorly crafty and clever the white man is, that black and Latino voters are just going to forget decades of bigotry and discrimination at the hands of the Repugnican Party because some white-male Repugnican Tea Party candidate comes up with just the right hocus-pocus, mindfuck rhetoric to hypnotize them into voting for him over their own best interests.

No amount of attempted-Jedi-mindfuck rhetoric and no amount of tokens (like Marco Rubio or Sarah Palin) are going to help the Repugnican Tea Party traitors in future elections. Only a small percentage of the members of the minority groups that historically have been oppressed by the Repugnican Tea Party (and women, of course, are no minority group) are going to fall for this the-foxes-actually-wuv-the-chickens bullshit.

No, what the Repugnican Tea Party traitors sorely need now is a time machine so that they can go back in time — waaay back in time — and treat certain groups of people a whole lot better than they did over at least many decades.

I wish them luck with that.

Advertisements

Leave a comment

Filed under Uncategorized

Why the rise of Cain

Republican Presidential candidate, Herman Cain campaigns in Talladega, Ala., Friday, Oct. 28, 2011. (AP Photo/Dave Martin)

Associated Press photo

Herman Cain rants and raves in Talladega, Alabama, yesterday. Recent polls have him at the top of the Repugnican Tea Party field, and indeed, as the photo below of him campaigning in Alabama yesterday apparently demonstrates, many of the overwhelmingly white “tea party” dipshits find him to be acceptable, since he’s not an “angry” black man who poses a threat to white rule.

Republican Presidential candidate, Herman Cain campaigns in Talladega, Ala., Friday, Oct. 28, 2011. (AP Photo/Dave Martin)

Associated Press photo

Maybe the “tea partiers” aren’t racist after all, since Herman Cain is leading even perennial Repugnican frontrunner Mitt Romney* in some recent polls, some are positing.

No, that’s not it.

Repugnican Tea Party presidential contender Herman Cain is more or less acceptable to many (if not most) of the Repugnican Tea Party traitors because he sides with the white conservative argument that if blacks and others are struggling — and they are — then it’s their own damn fault. Cain promotes Ayn-Randian social Darwinism — which contradicts everything that the (little-s”) socialist Jesus Christ taught, but these right-wing fascists call themselves “Christians” nonetheless — which is why so many conservatives find Cain to be acceptable. If he were preaching actual social justice, like Cornel West does, it would be an entirely other story.

And to many if not most of the plutocrats and their supporters, wealth trumps race, in this day and age. Sure, white conservatives prefer that if you are rich you also be white, but so long as you are rich — and support the capitalistic oppression of the non-rich — to some degree it can be overlooked if you aren’t white. So Cain has that going for him.

Another huge factor of Cain’s current success is that for some time the Repugnican Tea Party cynically has tried to match Barack Obama with brown-skinned Repugnicans (of which there aren’t many), such as former Repugnican National Committee chair Michael Steele (who was selected to head the party shortly after Obama took office in January 2009) and Louisiana Gov. Bobby Jindal. “See! We’re not racist!” is the entire point of that cynical exercise.

This campaign button that was for sale at Cain’s appearance in Alabama yesterday — which, admittedly, may not have been produced by the Cain campaign but may have been produced by some opportunistic independent profiteer —

Campaign buttons for Republican Presidential candidate Herman Cain are seen on sale as he campaigned in Talladega, Ala., Friday, Oct. 28, 2011. (AP Photo/Dave Martin)

Associated Press photo

— fairly blatantly compares Cain to Obama, apparently primarily because they’re both black men. That seems to me to be a rather perverse form of racism in itself.

It also presumes that most voters are incredibly stupid. (To be sure, a great many of them are, but probably most of them are not.) We were to believe that the selection of (anti-choice) Sarah Palin as John McCainosaurus’ running mate signified that the Repugnican Party is feminist, too — as opposed to the clearly anti-feminist Democratic Party, which chose Barack Obama over Billary Clinton.

Women voters didn’t buy that bullshit, and I wouldn’t expect voters to buy it that Herman Cain is good for the majority of blacks (or for the rest of us who aren’t rich) any more than Sarah Palin is good for women.

There’s also the dumbfuck factor. Just as wingnuts loved the English-challenged George W. Bush so much because he gave them hope that fucktards like they also could be president or otherwise make it big one day, Cain, with his oversimplistic bullshit, such as his “9-9-9” plan (which reminds me of an enraged Adolf Hitler screaming, “Nein! Nein! Nein!” in Quentin Tarantino’s “Inglorious Basterds,” and which, I understand, first was introduced to us in a video game called “SimCity”), appeals to the dumbfucks, who also believe that things are much simpler than they actually are, and that highly complex problems can be solved with simple solutions or even just simple slogans. (Simple minds think simple thoughts.)

Finally, Cain also has going for him the factor that actually also worked in Barack Obama’s favor, and that is that Obama did not have a long history in national politics before he ran for the White House. Obama was a relative unknown, having been elected to the U.S. Senate only in 2004, for fuck’s sake, before he became president in 2008, not even having finished out his six-year Senate term.

Cain has held no elected office at all, which, I suppose, makes him an even bigger unknown that Obama was — and thus, on that measure, an even “stronger” presidential candidate than Obama was, if being unknown is a strength. (Only in the crumbling American empire could it be.) Of course, the wingnuts’ blind faith that an unknown like Cain possesses even the bare minimum competence to be president of the United States (I mean, I don’t think that he could get all of his presidential policies from video games) is about as smart (in retrospect) as was our progressives’ blind faith that Obama the unknown actually would fulfill his ubiquitous campaign promises of “hope” and “change.”

I still expect Mitt Romney to secure the 2012 Repugnican Tea Party presidential nomination. Cain’s surge now is attributable not only to the factors above but also to how much Southerners don’t like Mitt from Massachusetts and to how, as another blogger put it, when he has to speak in a debate, Texas Gov. Rick Perry, who apparently was supposed to have been the South’s Great White Hope, turns into Porky Pig. (The inability to speak coherently seemed to work in Gee Dubya’s favor, but not in Perry’s. Go figure.**)

But, just as the Repugnicans cynically paired McCainosaurus up with a woman to show how “inclusive” the Repugnican Party is, I could see a Romney-Cain ticket for 2012.

In fact, I’d almost bet money on it.

P.S. I visited Cain’s official website’s store, and I don’t see the button that is pictured above. Again, I suspect that the button was produced by an opportunistic independent profiteer, as were these buttons, very apparently, which are available via cafepress.com, which apparently has no standards of decency whatsofuckingever:

Beat Obama 2.25" Button
Crackers for Cain 2.25" Button
Nice.

*A recent Faux “News” poll put Cain at four percentage points ahead of Romney, as did a recent CBS News/New York Times poll.

**Also, the Repugnican Tea Party acts as though the eight, long, nightmarish years of the unelected reign of the BushCheneyCorp never even fucking happened. I remember well that the McCainosaurus-Palin ticket never talked about George W. Bush’s “accomplishments,” but only talked about Ronald Reagan, and the current crop of Repugnican Tea Party presidential contenders also are reaching waaaaay back to the Reagan years and acting as though George W. Bush had never been president.

I surmise that this Gee Dubya stigma is hurting Perry, who, the Repugnican Tea Partiers fear, correctly, is way too reminiscent of the last governor of Texas who went to the White House.

Leave a comment

Filed under Uncategorized

Will Herb Cain Steele the 2012 Repugnican nomination?

Republican presidential candidate and businessman Herman Cain makes a point while participating in a Republican presidential debate with the other hopefuls at Dartmouth College in Hanover

Reuters photo

Pizza guy Herman Cain pontificates at last night’s Repugnican Tea Party debate in New Hampshire. I didn’t watch the debate — I’m not a masochist — but I understand that the highlight of the debate was Michele “With Eyes Like Deer’s in Headlights” Bachmann quite presidentially remarking that if you turn Cain’s “999” plan upside down, you have 666. (Video clip of that here.)

Wow. What does it say about the Repugnican Tea Party that a former pizza boss is in its top tier of 2012 presidential contenders?

Really: WTF? The head of Subway is too busy to run for the White House?

A Reuters/Ipsos poll puts Mitt Romney at No. 1, with 23 percent of Repugnican Tea Party support, and Herman Cain at No. 2, with 19 percent. Not Rick Perry, but Ron Paul, came in at No. 3, with 13 percent, and Perry came in fourth, with 10 percent.

That poll was taken within the past week, but before last night’s Repugnican Tea Party presidential debate.

An NBC News/Wall Street Journal poll, also taken within the past week but before last night’s debate, puts Cain at No. 1, with 27 percent; Romney at No. 2, with 23 percent; Perry at No. 3, with 16 percent; and Paul at No. 4, with 11 percent.

It’s safe to conclude, I think, that for the time being, anyway, it’s Romney and Cain at the top two slots, with Perry and Paul competing for No. 3.

Don’t get me wrong. I don’t expect Herman Cain to emerge as the 2012 Repugnican Tea Party nominee. Never having held elected office, and with his “999” plan kind of sounding like something that the “rent is too damn high” guy might make the centerpiece of his presidential campaign, I’d be surprised if Cain emerges as the victor.

However, it’s not impossible. The Repugnican Party reacted to the election of Barack Obama in November 2008 by making Michael Steele the first black chairman of the Repugnican National Committee in January 2009.

Steele’s highest elected office had been lieutenant governor. Of Maryland. That apparently was the best that the Repugnican Party could do in terms of finding a black person within its membership to head the national party.

Steele cynically was selected primarily for the color of his skin. It was the Repugnican Party’s attempt at “proving” to the nation that it wuvs black people, too.

Of course, Steele — because he was, in a bizarre example of reverse racial discrimination, chosen for his race and not for his competence — was a bumbling party leader, and the Repugs ousted him in January of this year and replaced him with the more traditional face of the Repugnican Tea Party leader — a white guy.

After Steele, I’d thought that the Repugnican Tea Party leaders were done with trying to match Obama with another black man, but perhaps not. Yes, I could see them believing that the way to go in November 2012 would be to put another black man against Obama, even if no one in the party knew who the hell Herman Cain was a few months ago. (Sarah Palin not long ago infamously repeatedly referred to him as “Herb” Cain.)

Actually, the Repugs might see that — besides his race — as Cain’s strength: that he’s an unknown. People know Mitt Romney and they don’t like him, as evidenced by the fact that he can’t garner even a full 25 percent of his own party’s support. Cain is unknown enough that he might slip through, just like President Hopey-Changey did.

No president in my lifetime has not first been a U.S. governor, a U.S. senator or a U.S. vice president before ascending to the Oval Office.

If a former pizza guy actually makes it to the White House, while there might finally be some truth in our telling our children that they, too, could become president of the United States one day, it really would be time to seriously seek Canadian citizenship.

Leave a comment

Filed under Uncategorized

Assorted shit

Weiner weirdness

This man-bulge may or may not be that of U.S. Rep. Anthony Weiner, and this image may or may not have been manipulated. In any event, I’m pretty creeped out…

I don’t much care about “Weinergate,” but I did watch Rachel Maddow’s interview with New York U.S. Rep. Anthony Weiner last night, and if I were Weiner’s political adviser, I’d advise him to STFU already. The more he talks, the deeper he digs his own hole.

After watching his interview with Maddow, I suspected that Weiner must (have) be(en) a lawyer, but his profile on Wikipedia indicates that this is not the case (his father was a lawyer, however, Wikipedia reports). But Weiner is lawyer-like in that he apparently believes that if he just throws a bunch of words at you, he’ll confuse you and you’ll just go away, because he’s some super-genius magician who can bamboozle anyone with his stupefying word magic.

From what I can gather from Weiner’s strange interview with Maddow, he acknowledges that the image of a substantial erect penis inside of gray underwear (see above) might be an image of him, but that it also might have been digitally or otherwise altered, and that in any case, regardless of whose erection it is, and whether or not the image of it has been altered, he claims that he never sent the image to anyone, so it was someone else who did it as a “weiner”-based “prank,” ha ha ha ha ha.

You know, maybe it’s just me, but if someone (or if I) had ever taken a picture of my erection, inside or outside of my underwear, I’d know it. For certain. Just sayin’.

In any event, the more that Weiner talks about it, the skankier and creepier he comes off. If he doesn’t STFU already, he just might turn me off from men forever.

Mittmania begins!

Romney enters 2012 White House race

AFP photo

Well, she seems excited! And so does this little tot:

Mitt Romney, Ann Romney, Sam Beatonafter

Associated Press photo

Yawn-inducing Repugnican Party hack Mitt Romney has made his 2012 presidential quest official today.

He has kicked it off by proclaiming that “Barack Obama has failed America,” as though the years 2001 through 2008 never fucking happened. (Yup. We went right from Bill Clinton to Barack Obama, you see.)

Obama is far from perfect, and he has reneged on many if not most of his progressive campaign promises, but to assert that any of the Repugnican (Tea) Party traitors who now have their eye on the White House is the solution to the problems that the unelected BushCheneyCorp left us with is beyond insane. (To talk about putting another Texas governor in the White House especially is insane.)

I still expect Romney to win the 2012 Repugnican (Tea) Party presidential nomination, primarily because he apparently is the party establishment’s anointed one — and, as The Associated Press notes, “Romney has built an experienced political team, collected serious campaign cash and crafted a campaign that is ready to go full-bore,” and “While his likely opponents have jostled for the spotlight, Romney largely has worked in private to fine-tune his political machine” — but, as I’ve noted before, Romney is about as exciting as was 1996 presidential candidate Bob Dole.

Is anyone on the planet jazzed up over Mitt Romney? Anyone?

When he makes his proclamations, such as that “Barack Obama has failed America,” and when he titles his latest book No Apology: The Case for American Greatness (as though he somehow could take at least partial credit for that “greatness” for which he smugly offers “no apology”), it falls fairly flat. (The paperback edition of No Apology has the new subtitle of Believe in America, by the way.)

Call me awful, but I suspect that Romney’s Mormonism contributes greatly to his blandness, as Mormons are expected to be (or at least are expected to appear to be) squeaky clean and beyond any moral reproach, which makes them more like Stepford wives (and husbands and children) than like real, live, authentic human beings.

And there’s no way in hell that I’d ever vote for an active Mormon of any party, not only because Mormonism is a cult with bizarre, bullshit beliefs, but because I’ll never forgive the patriarchal, misogynist, white supremacist, homophobic, xenophobic Mormon Cult for its participation in the narrow passage of Prop Hate.

Why Cain cain’t win

Michele Bachmann, Herman Cain

Associated Press photo

Wingnutty former pizza boss Herman Cain and “tea party” whackjob U.S. Rep. Michele Bachmann ham it up for the cameras in New Hampshire earlier this week.

Repugnican (Tea) Party presidential hopeful Herman Cain, whose main claim to any sort of thing remotely even like fame is that he used to be the boss of the Godfather’s Pizza chain, has been polling in the double digits among the Repugnican (Tea) Party traitors lately.

Salon.com yesterday wondered aloud why Cain is doing so well in the polls right now, but didn’t go there, so I will: Cain, who is black, is the cynical Repugnican (Tea) Party’s answer to Barack Obama.

How tempting it is to front a black man to “prove” that the Repugnican (Tea) Party is the party for black people! (Indeed, Cain has called the Democratic Party a “plantation” for blacks, and while the Democratic Party hasn’t done nearly enough for blacks as it should have done, to refer to it as a “plantation” is a considerable stretch, especially since the Repugnican [Tea] Party that Cain represents has done even less for blacks than has the Democratic Party.)

But the thing is, with former Repugnican National Committee chair Michael Steele, the Repugnican (Tea) Party tried that cynical strategy already: The Repugnicans elected Steele in January 2009 as a cynical response to Obama’s election in November 2008, and then they booted the bumbling Steele (whose highest elected office had been lieutenant governor of Maryland, that’s how few black Repugnican politicians there are) two years later, replacing him with the party’s traditional white man.

And given that the main problem that the “tea party” traitors have with Obama is that he isn’t 100 percent white, how well are they going to take to Cain, even though on many if not most of the issues he talks like they do?

I suspect that Cain’s supporters are the same party-establishment types who had thought that it was such a swell idea to put Steele at the head of their party. I just can’t see Cain doing very well among the “tea party” se(c)t, whose gatherings look like KKK rallies.

Even if he made it alive out of the 2012 Repugnican Tea Party presidential primary season — which he won’t — every U.S. president since Dwight D. Eisenhower has been at least a U.S. senator, the governor of a state or U.S. vice president. And Cain hasn’t held a single elected office.

And I just can’t see a significant number of black American voters defecting from Barack Obama’s “plantation” to Uncle Herman’s cabin in November 2012.

Herman Cain doesn’t mean that the Repugnican Tea Party is great for blacks any more than Sarah Palin or Michele Bachmann means that the Repugnican Tea Party is great for women.

That the Repugnican Tea Party apparently believes that blacks (and women) will believe otherwise only demonstrates the party’s contempt for them.

Leave a comment

Filed under Uncategorized

Stop lynching Cornel West and hold Barack Obama accountable for once

 Harsh words: Professor Cornell West, seen here with then-senator Barack Obama on the campaign trail in New York, has turned on the president

So many black progressives have been thrown under Barack Obama’s bus (Jeremiah Wright, Van Jones, Shirley Sherrod, et. al.)  that the bus no longer can move an inch. Let’s not add the corpse of Cornel West (pictured above with Barack Obama when Obama was campaigning for the White House) to the under-bus body count.

Left-wing activist and scholar Cornel West is under fire for, among other strong statements, recently having called President Barack Obama “a black mascot of Wall Street oligarchs and a black puppet of corporate plutocrats,” adding, “And now he has become head of the American killing machine and is proud of it.”

I have no real problem with those words because I have no problem with the truth. The truth is the truth, even if only one person in a thousand (or ten thousand or a hundred thousand or a million or…) is willing to utter it in a sea of lemmings. (Or, as Ted Rall aptly calls Obama’s allegedly left-of-center followers, “Obamabots.”)

The only exception that I can take to calling Obama “a black mascot of Wall Street oligarchs and a black puppet of corporate plutocrats” is that I don’t know that it’s necessary to emphasize “black.” A mascot of Wall Street oligarchs or a puppet of corporate plutocrats is a problem, regardless of the mascot’s or puppet’s race, sex, sexual orientation, religious orientation, age, etc.

Maybe West emphasized “black” because at least on some level he expects a fellow black man to be progressive, like he is. But, as West himself has acknowledged, Obama “[grew] up in a white context,” so “all he has known culturally is white.”

Because Obama is not the descendent of African slaves and because he was raised by his white mother’s family, it is unfair for descendents of African slaves, like West, to expect Obama to be a carbon copy of themselves*, and, it seems to me, because he is half white and half black, it always has been Obama’s own prerogative to embrace one half more than the other, even if he had a choice in the matter, but, given his upbringing, I don’t see that he had much of a choice. (Children don’t get to pick who raises them.)

My problem with Obama is that he has betrayed his progressive base. He made campaign promises — promises that I took seriously, not cynically, as in the assertion that all politicians make and then break their promises, and so you’re stupid if you believe otherwise — and then he systematically proceeded to break his promises, denouncing his left-wing critics as hopelessly delusional about political reality as he did so (and his “bots” dutifully, blindly follow his lead in that).

Obama promised “hope” and “change,” and because of his promises I gave him hundreds of dollars and my vote. But instead of “hope” and “change,” we still have an economy in shambles, we still hand over billions of dollars to corporate welfare recipients, and we still give the war profiteers billions of our tax dollars via the bogus warfare in the Middle East and elsewhere while the American empire rots from within here at home.

Oh, but we got Osama bin Laden! But that and a quarter won’t even buy us a Coke and a smile.

I don’t claim to agree with West on everything, because I don’t know everything that he has proclaimed, but I like him. I saw him speak here in Sacramento (where he was raised) some years ago, and I was moved by his talk about the black American experience to the point that I got tears in my eyes. (Unfortunately, I was one of the only white people in the audience, and maybe even the only one, and brother West was, for the most part, preaching to the choir; those who really should have been there, who really needed to be there, were not there. [But doesn’t it almost always seem to go that way?])

Yes, I consider Cornel West to be a brother, but I am concerned that perhaps he and I define the term “brother” differently. I consider someone who shares my progressive values and worldview to be my brother or sister, regardless of his or her race, age, sexual orientation or even religious orientation. As a fellow democratic socialist, I consider West to be my brother. But, because I am white, would West call me “brother”? I would like to think so, but I’m not certain.**

I can’t know what it’s like to be a descendent of black slaves, and I would never, like Bill Clinton or at least John Kerry did, insinuate that I, who although I’ve always been middle class was born into some degree of white privilege, truly feel black Americans’ pain. I have not walked in their shoes, so I cannot, and so I do not, make that claim. (Bill Clinton was called by many as “the first black president,” and Kerry once stupidly stated that he wanted to be “the next black president.” I find such faux familiarity to be disrespectful as well as false.)

Even if he would not call me “brother,” I am not going to jump on the bandwagon of throwing Cornel West under the bus like Barack Obama threw his former pastor, Jeremiah Wright, under the bus, and then Van Jones and then Shirley Sherrod. I think that such rhetoric as that of Salon.com editor Joan Walsh (who was a staunch Billary Clinton ’08 supporter before she became an Obamabot) that West has had a “tragic meltdown,” not only is overblown but is deleterious to progressivism.

Walsh writes of “the unrealistic left” (which is, I surmise, akin to the Obama administration’s “professional left”) and proclaims:

I’m on record saying that despite my disappointments on the economic and civil liberties front, I support Obama’s re-election: He’s as progressive a leader as we’re able to elect right now, and if you have issues with him – as I do – it’s time to work to elect strong Democrats at the state and local level. I’m pro-Obama – and also pro-reasonable organizing efforts to push him left.

“[Un]reasonable.” “[Un]realistic.” These are interesting terms. Fucking fact is, Obama had the nation’s good will and both houses of Congress controlled by his party for two fucking years, and he squandered that rare opportunity to push through a progressive agenda.

For that alone he does not deserve re-election, but sellouts — Obamabots — like Walsh, who actually make such statements as “despite my disappointments on the economic and civil liberties front, I [still] support Obama’s re-election” since Obama is the lesser of the politically viable evils, are destroying what’s left of the left.

How can we actual leftists have “unrealistic” expectations when so-called “Democratic” sellouts like Obama don’t even try? How can you know what’s possible and what’s impossible to achieve, what is realistic and what is unrealistic, when you surrender from the very fucking beginning? The establishment Democrats almost always surrender before the game even begins. Meanwhile, the Repugnican Tea Party traitors roll out such radical ideas as decimating Medicare. Yes, they are stupid, but they’re bold.

As the Repugnican Tea Party traitors succeed in pushing the nation’s politics further and further to the right, Obamabots like Joan Walsh help the wingnuts by contributing to the rightward drift of the Democratic Party, which began under Bill Clinton, by excusing anything and everything that establishment/Clintonesque Democrats do or don’t do, simply because they use the “Democratic” label — and because these Democrats in name only are, the Obamabots assert, the best that we can do. (And besides, what do you want? A Repugnican president?)

That Barack Obama isn’t as bad as are the Repugnican Tea Party traitors who want to be president just doesn’t fucking cut it for me. He’d have to do much better than that for me to give him another penny or my vote again.

Obama’s new campaign in which you can buy a T-shirt or a mug displaying his birth certificate and the words “MADE in the USA” under his portrait —

— is clever, but the nation needs an awful lot more than more clever Obama campaigns right now, and on the heels of having been punk’d by the “hope” and “change” campaign, I, for one, am just not in the mood to fall for yet another clever Obama campaign. (Although if I were working on the Obama campaign, my snappy slogan might be something like: “Barack Obama 2012: Really This Time!”)

I suppose that I have to give props to Team Obama for finding a way to turn the pathetic and racist birth certificate bullshit into a fundraising campaign, but I cannot, in good conscience, give Team Obama even a penny, as clever as the new campaign is.

At some point this sellout shit has to stop. I, for one, don’t want to be responsible, even minutely, for its perpetuation — even by buying one of the clever T-shirts or mugs.

But back to brother West.

Let’s not make him into a scapegoat for the serious failings of Barack Obama as president of the United States of America. Instead, let’s continue to talk about identity politics versus political ideology and what roles they have and what roles they should have in rescuing the American experiment from the edge of the abyss.

As a gay man, for instance, while it would be great to have a gay or lesbian president, I’d much rather have a heterosexual president who actually is progressive than a gay or lesbian president who, like Obama, is too cowardly or too personally comfortable (or both) to pursue a progressive agenda.

Similarly, I’m not impressed by the mere fact that Obama is the first actual (half-)black president. There are plenty of wingnutty black men, such as (not in any certain order) U.S. Supreme Court “Justice” Clarence Thomas, recently booted Repugnican National Committee chair Michael Steele, former Ohio Secretary of State Kenneth Blackwell (who delivered the pivotal state of Ohio to George W. Bush in 2004 much as how Katherine Harris had delivered the pivotal state of Florida to Bush in 2000), and presidential aspirants Herman Cain and Alan Keyes, and I’d never want any of them anywhere near the White House, not because of the color of their skin, but because of the content of their character. (On that note, I once saw Al Sharpton speak here in Sacramento [in early 2005, I believe it was], and I still remember his quip that “Condoleezza Rice [yet another black wingnut, as well as a war criminal] is of my color but is not of my kind.”)

The problem with Barack Obama isn’t that he isn’t “black enough.” The problem is that he isn’t progressive enough — and that he had promised to be progressive, but broke that promise.

That is the discussion that we need to be having instead of kicking around brother Cornel West.

P.S. I highly recommend the article on Cornel West by Chris Hedges that stirred the West brouhaha. It is here. In the article, Hedges quotes West as having said other things that are making people butt-hurt, such as that Obama “feels most comfortable with upper middle-class white and Jewish men who consider themselves very smart, very savvy and very effective in getting what they want,” which to me more or less seems to be true, whether it’s considered politically correct or not, but Hedges also quotes West as having said other things that aren’t being repeated as much as are his “controversial” statements, such as

“This [Obama’s presidency] was maybe America’s last chance to fight back against the greed of the Wall Street oligarchs and corporate plutocrats, to generate some serious discussion about public interest and common good that sustains any democratic experiment.

“We are squeezing out all of the democratic juices we have. The escalation of the class war against the poor and the working class is intense. More and more working people are beaten down. They are world-weary. They are into self-medication. They are turning on each other. They are scapegoating the most vulnerable rather than confronting the most powerful.

“It is a profoundly human response to panic and catastrophe. I thought Barack Obama could have provided some way out. But he lacks backbone.”

and

“Can you imagine if Barack Obama had taken office and deliberately educated and taught the American people about the nature of the financial catastrophe and what greed was really taking place?

“If he had told us what kind of mechanisms of accountability needed to be in place, if he had focused on homeowners rather than investment banks for bailouts and engaged in massive job creation, he could have nipped in the bud the right-wing populism of the tea party folk.

“The tea party folk are right when they say the government is corrupt. It is corrupt. Big business and banks have taken over government and corrupted it in deep ways.

“We have got to attempt to tell the truth, and that truth is painful. It is a truth that is against the thick lies of the mainstream. In telling that truth we become so maladjusted to the prevailing injustice that the Democratic Party, more and more, is not just milquetoast and spineless, as it was before, but thoroughly complicitous with some of the worst things in the American empire.

“I don’t think in good conscience I could tell anybody to vote for Obama. If it turns out in the end that we have a crypto-fascist movement and the only thing standing between us and fascism is Barack Obama, then we have to put our foot on the brake. But we’ve got to think seriously of third-party candidates, third formations, third parties….”

Yup. This perhaps was our last chance to turn it around, and Obama thus far has only blown it. Ironically, West could have been talking about himself when he noted that the people “are turning on each other,” “scapegoating the most vulnerable rather than confronting the most powerful,” because right now they’re scapegoating West instead of confronting Obama, who apparently likes the presidency only for its perks. He certainly has no stomach for the hard work that a truly progressive president has before him or her.

Anyway, I also recommend Chris Hedges’ book Death of the Liberal Class, which is about “liberal” sellouts like Joan Walsh who in their cowardice, laziness, selfishness and hypocrisy aid and abet the right wing in the right wing’s destruction of the nation and the planet.

*West also remarked that “Obama, coming out of Kansas influence, [with] white, loving grandparents, coming out of Hawaii and Indonesia, when he meets these independent black folk who have a history of slavery, Jim Crow, Jane Crow and so on, he is very apprehensive. He has a certain rootlessness, a deracination. It is understandable.”

“Deracination”? Is an identification with a history of slavery required to be considered to be black? Is Obama really required to identify with the descendents of black slaves when he is not such a descendent and was not raised by the descendents of slaves? Is this not demanding too much of Obama?

**West has referred to economists Joseph Stiglitz and Paul Krugman as “brother Joseph Stiglitz and brother Paul Krugman,” and so I tend to believe that his definition of “brother” is about ideology, not race, but he also has referred to Obama as “brother,” yet rather clearly disagrees with Obama’s politics, so I am uncertain as to his own personal definition of the term.

Leave a comment

Filed under Uncategorized

The predictable political deaths of Palin and Steele



Orlando Sentinel photo

Michael Steele and Sarah Palin embrace at a rally in Orlando, Florida, in October.

Repugnican National Committee chair Michael Steele, the RNC’s first black chair, has dropped out of the race to lead the RNC for the next two years, and we’ll never see a President Palin. (Sarah’s chances before this week weren’t good anyway, but her incredibly narcissistic and sociopathic response to the massacre in Tucson on Saturday sealed her fate.)

But it’s not like either Palin or Steele really had the love of the Repugnican Party anyway.

Repugnican John McCainosaurus chose Palin as his running mate after Barack Obama rather than Billary Clinton had emerged as the 2008 Democratic presidential candidate. The choice of Palin was, in large part, a cynical ploy to convince the nation’s women that the Repugnican Party, not the Democratic Party, is the true party of feminism — never mind that Palin sets women back by several decades.

The Repugnican Party, you see, believed (perhaps still believes) that women are stupid.

And shortly after Obama took office in January 2009, the RNC, in a cynical ploy to convince the nation that the Repugnican Party is just as friendly to blacks as is the Democratic Party, put Michael Steele, whose highest post had been lieutenant governor of Maryland, in charge of the show. (That the best that the RNC could do was the former lieutenant governor of a tiny state shows how many high-ranking blacks within the party the RNC had to choose from.)

Two years later, Steele got the boot, and a white man (surprise surprise) probably will be his replacement.

True, Steele, as the majority of Repugnicans are, is a bumbling idiot, but another factor in his ouster, I believe, is that his skin color didn’t magically make the Repugnican Tea Party any more attractive to those outside of the white supremacist set.

And Sarah, Sarah, Sarah.

Palin was not, I surmise, supposed to try to go beyond being John McCainosaurus’ running mate, but, as she put it herself, she “went rogue” and made herself the fascistic face of the Repugnican Tea Party. Palin was supposed to have been just a prop, but she very apparently had ambitions of her own. (With emphasis there on “had.”)

Had the “tea party” element of the Repugnican Party been more successful on Election Day in November (significant “tea party” losses included Joe Miller’s, Sharron Angle’s and Christine O’Donnell’s for the U.S. Senate), the Repugnican Party might have been willing to tolerate Palin for a while longer, but the “tea party” is sputtering out, and this past week proved that Palin is becoming much more of a liability than an asset for the traditional GOP. 

And now, the true face of the Repugnican Party has re-emerged in the white-male faces of the likes of Speaker of the House John “Cry Me a River” Boehner, Darrell “Joseph McCarthy Jr.” Issa and Reince Priebus, the Repugnican Party chair of Wisconsin, who probably will succeed Steele (and who apparently is meant to cynically appeal to the youthful vote, since previous appeals to the women’s vote and the non-white vote didn’t work out so well…).

And not a single female or non-white face is among those who are considered to be serious contenders for the 2012 Repugnican Tea Party presidential nomination. (Indeed, stupid white male presidential wannabe Mitt Romney already is jet-setting around the globe like some sort of shadow president, which I find to be rather treasonous, at least in spirit if not in the letter of the law.) 

Sarah Palin and Michael Steele were lame attempts to con the country into believing that the Repugnican Party is diverse.

But the country didn’t buy the con job, and now that they no longer are needed, the Repugnican Party has relegated Steele and Palin to the dustbin of history.

P.S. Moments after I posted this, the breaking news came that Reince Priebus has been named the new head of the RNC.

So here is the new face of the Repugnican Party:

Priebus attends a debate among five candidates ...

Reuters photo (taken Jan. 3, 2011)

Leave a comment

Filed under Uncategorized

Cunter: Afghanistan war good under Bush, bad under B. Hussein Obama

I haven’t heard anything about Ann Cunter in ages. In fact, because she apparently has been displaced by Grand Dragon Glenn Beck and Grand Dragoness Sarah Palin-Quayle, she plummeted to No. 11 on my Top 10 Wingnuts Whose Deaths I’d Celebrate list for 2010.

Apparently, however, she’s baaaaaaaack!

Cunter now is backing Repugnican National Committee chairman Michael Steele in his recent assertion that the Afghanistan war is unwinnable and that the quagmire in Afghanistan is all President Barack Obama’s fault.

I read her recent rant (reading that harpy’s shit is always like making a little visit to the bowels of hell; I do it for you, dear reader), and her basic claim is that the unelected Bush regime (well, the “unelected” part is mine, not hers) did swell when it initially invaded Afghanistan in October 2001, but now, President Barack Obama has fucked it all up.

Everyone knows that you can’t do nation building in Afghanistan, Cunter writes; that’s why the Bush regime spent little time in Afghanistan before its Eye of Sauron switched its gaze from Afghanistan to Iraq: because nation building was possible there, which the BushCheneyCorp (again, my term, not hers…), in its infinite wisdom, knew.

Except that the unelected Bush regime never used nation building as its main pretense for launching its illegal, immoral, unprovoked and unjust Vietraq War in March 2003. The unelected Bush regime used the treasonous lie that Iraq possessed weapons of mass destruction that threatened the security of the United States, its allies and its interests to justify its invasion and subsequent occupation of the sovereign nation of Iraq against the wishes of the United Nations and against world opinion.

Fact is, the Bush regime invaded Afghanistan in late 2001 only as a show; it was a token display that the Bush regime really cared — really! — about what had happened on 9/11, from which it had failed utterly to protect the nation despite the August 2001 presidential daily briefing titled “Bin Laden Determined to Strike in U.S.”

It’s not that the Bush regime had the wisdom to not remain in Afghanistan; it’s that the members of the Bush regime had wanted to invade Iraq even before George W. Bush & Co. stole office in late 2000, and Afghanistan wasn’t part of their original plans.

Now — now that Barack Obama is in office — Ann Cunter comes out against the war in Afghanistan. She had many years to come out publicly against it: 2002, 2003, 2004, 2005, 2006, 2007, 2008. But BushCheneyCorp remained in power during those years, so she bit her forked tongue.

She even had all of 2009, when Obama inherited it, to make a principled stand against the Afghanistan war.

But she didn’t.

She made a stand only after the dufus chairman of the Repugnican National Committee, who doesn’t know his ass from a ruptured oil well uncontrollably gushing millions of gallons of crude, was caught on video voicing his opinion that the Afghanistan war is unwinnable and that it’s Obama’s mess now.

In Cunter’s Orwellian world, when the head of the party fucks up and diametrically misstates the stance on a major issue that the party has taken for years, you don’t chastise the head of the party — you simply change your official stance to match the new stance that the party’s head has now proclaimed.

It’s what you call saving face — on crack.

Although she’s been out of the national spotlight for some time now, Cunter remains in fine form. Not only can she actually assert that the Repugnican Party should change its stance on a major issue because its chairman misspoke, but she still is repeating the lie that Iraq had posed a threat to the United States, a lie that thoroughly was debunked years ago. She froths:

But Iraq also was a state sponsor of terrorism; was attempting to build nuclear weapons (according to endless bipartisan investigations in this country and in Britain — thanks, liberals!); nurtured and gave refuge to Islamic terrorists — including the 1993 World Trade Center bombers; was led by a mass murderer who had used weapons of mass destruction; paid bonuses to the families of suicide bombers; had vast oil reserves; and is situated at the heart of a critical region.

Um, there was no “bipartisan” anyfuckingthing where the Vietraq War was concerned. With its dire warnings of “smoking guns coming in the form of mushroom clouds,” the unelected Bush regime crammed its Vietraq War down the nation’s (and the world’s) throat, did not merely misintepret intelligence but blatantly lied about what the intelligence was (and then blamed the intelligence community’s “faulty” intelligence), and made it clear that anyone — perhaps especially Democrats in Congress — who dared to try to stand in the way of the impending Vietraq War were terrorist-lovin’ traitors.

We can’ t allow the likes of Ann Cunter try to rewrite history, such as by claiming that there was “bipartisan” support for the Vietraq War when, in fact, the spineless Democrats, in the hysterical, paranoid, pseudo-patriotic national environment that the unelected Bush regime and its right-wing supporters whipped up post-9/11, were too intimidated by the Bush regime and its right-wing cheerleaders not to support the Bush regime’s illegal, immoral, unprovoked and unjust Vietraq War. 

The only portion of that excerpt of Cunter’s bile and venom above that has some truth to it is that indeed Iraq has oil reserves (although not as “vast” as Cunter would like us to believe) — oil reserves that Big Oil (of which the Bush and Cheney crime families long have been part) is now exploiting, since the Bush regime invaded and took over the sovereign nation of Iraq primarily for access to its oil reserves (it’s “stealing” and “murdering” when you or I do it, but it’s “national security” or “national interests” when the stupid filthy rich white men steal and commit mass murder for their corporate greed) — and that Iraq is strategically located in the Middle East.

Still, Cunter might just turn out, after all, to be a useful idiot.

In her latest frothing Cunter slams Dick spawn Liz Cheney, whom I also hate with a passion, and so I’m perfectly fine with Cunter and the spawn of Dick ripping out each other’s bleach-blonde hair and clawing each other’s faces with their press-on nails in their wingnutty bitch-slapping quest to become the Bimbo Queen of the Wingnuts, a title that already has been claimed by Sarah Palin-Quayle. (Hell, I’d pay to watch a death match between those two cunts.)

And I’m fine with the right wing turning against the war in Afghanistan — which, while I certainly agree is unwinnable, is “Obama’s war” as much as the trashed economy that he inherited from the unelected, treasonous BushCheneyCorp, which ran the nation into the ground from 2001 through 2008, is “Obama’s economy.”

I have to wonder, though, what the wingnuts would say if Obama, following Ann Cunter’s latest counsel, actually did pull us out of Afghanistan.

Surely they’d say that he’s a terrorist-lovin’ Manchurian president who wants to just hand our good little lily white virtuous Christian virgin girls over to filthy, savage Muslim rapists on a silver platter.

After all, it is Ann Cunter who historically has referred to Barack Obama as “B. Hussein Obama” — emphasizing his Middle-Eastern middle name in order to imply strongly that his loyalty lies not with the United States of America, but with his Muslim brethren in the Middle East.

Now, though, Cunter blathers, President B. Hussein Obama should pull us out of Afghanistan.

Don’t even try to figure it out — or you’ll become as bat-shit crazy as are Ann Cunter and the rest of the wingnuts.

Leave a comment

Filed under Uncategorized