Tag Archives: Palin

Mitt Romney: The next Bob Dole

In honor of Mitt Romney officially announcing his 2012 presidential bid today, I am reposting the following piece, which I originally posted on March 6.

I have little to add — and the poll numbers remain pretty much the same — except that it’s clear that Romney, especially in comparison to such whackjobs as Michele Bachmann, is going to emerge as the most electable (that is, the most inoffensive) candidate to the old school Repugnican Party establishment, which pretty much means that the 2012 Repugnican Tea Party nomination is all his.

Romney will bore the voters to death (like wooden Repugnican presidential candidate Bob Dole did in 1996), and Barack Obama will win re-election. You have to be pretty fucking boring to make Barack Obama seem exciting again.

(I would love for Obama to have a strong primary challenge — and by “strong” I don’t mean just giving him a little scare, but making his loss of the nomination a very real possibility — but the old school Democratic Party establishment will turn anyone who dares to oppose Obama [who more and more resembles the wizard of Oz, all talk and no substance, and never mind what’s behind that curtain over there!] into a political pariah, so I don’t expect a strong primary challenge to Obama. I expect nothing of the Democratic Party these days except continual cave-ins to the Repugnican Tea Party in the name of “compromise” and “bipartisanship.”)  

Mitt Romney

Mitt Romney

Mitt Romney

Associated Press photos

Above: Repugnican Mitt Romney pontificates at the Conservative Political Action Conference in Washington, D.C., [in February]. Below: Failed 1996 Repugnican presidential candidate Bob Dole appears at a rally for Repugnican Tea Party nutjob Sarah Palin in Raleigh, N.C., in November 2008.

Bob Dole - Sarah Palin Campaigns In Raleigh Three Days Before Election

Getty Images

Repugnican Mitt Romney will be the 2012 Repugnican Tea Party presidential candidate. And he will lose to Barack Obama in November 2012.

Romney consistently appears in the top three favorites of Repugnican Tea Party members for the 2012 Repugnican Tea Party presidential nomination in recent nationwide polls. He usually ranks under Mike Huckabee but above Sarah Palin.

A Feb. 24-Feb. 28 NBC/Wall Street Journal poll, for instance, put Huckabee at 25 percent, Romney at 21 percent, has-been Newt Gingrich at 13 percent, and Palin at a measly 12 percent.

A Feb. 19-Feb. 20 Gallup poll put Huckabee at 18 percent, Romney at 16 percent, Palin also at 16 percent, and Gingrich at 9 percent.

Finally, a Feb. 12-Feb. 15 Newsweek/Daily Beast poll put Romney at 19 percent, Huckabee at 18 percent, and Palin at 10 percent.

It’s a safe bet, I think, to write off Palin and Gingrich (and anyone else) and to narrow it down to Romney and Huckabee.

Huckabee is doing only slightly better than is Romney in most polls, and the closer that we get to November 2012, the more the crotchety Huckabee will remind Repugnican Tea Party voters of 2008 presidential loser John McCainosaurus, I believe. Their angry, bitter, old white guy lost in November 2008 to the much younger (gasp!) black guy by 7 percent of the popular vote, and they don’t want a repeat of that, I’m sure.*

Huckabee’s latest trips are asserting falsely that Barack Obama grew up in his father’s homeland of Kenya (Obama actually grew up in Hawaii and in Indonesia [mostly in Hawaii] – doesn’t Huckabee pay attention to the birthers?) and that recent best-actress winner Natalie Portman is awful for being an unwed pregnant woman, quite reminiscent of Repugnican retard (that’s redundant…) Dan Quayle’s remark way back in 1992 that the fictitious television character of Murphy Brown, who on the TV show had had a child out of wedlock, was a horrible example for others.

Huckabee, a former Southern Baptist minister, is living in the distant past. The majority of Americans no longer give a shit whether a woman chooses to have a baby inside or outside of marriage. The majority of Americans correctly believe it to be the woman’s business and no one fucking else’s. (And they know that Barack Obama was not raised in Kenya.)

Romney, on the other hand, is expected to avoid social/culture-war issues in his quest for the White House and to emphasize the nation’s economic woes. After all, for him to emphasize social/culture-war issues would only emphasize the fact that he is a Mormon, which is troublesome not only for anti-theocratic progressives like me (I’m a gay progressive, so there’s no way in hell that I’d ever vote for an active Mormon), but for Huckabee’s base of non-Mormon “Christo”fascists, the majority of whom believe that Mormonism isn’t Christian.

Already Romney has coined his “Obama Misery Index,” which is predicated on convincing the majority of the American voters that we went right from Bill Clinton to Barack Obama – that the eight, long, nightmarish years of rule by the unelected BushCheneyCorp regime never fucking happened. (George W. Bush inherited a federal budget surplus from Bill Clinton but ended his two unelected terms with a record federal budget deficit.)

Romney also is parroting Repugnican icon Ronald Reagan’s “trickle-down” economics (even more tax breaks for the corporations will result in more jobs for Americans, Romney is lying), which never worked and which never will.

While Romney is launching a campaign of blatant fucking lies that the national economy was just fine until Barack Obama came along and that Romney has the solutions for our nation’s economic ills, Romney at least is focusing on what the majority of the 2012 voters care about: their pocketbooks (and not, say, Natalie Portman’s Murphy-Brown-like pregnancy).

And let’s face it: Romney is a lot more telegenic than is the wall-eyed Huckabee, too. In presidential (hell, in almost all) politics today, how you look matters. It should not, but it does.

Further, Romney inexplicably became governor of the blue state of Massachusetts (for one four-year term from 2003 to 2007), so he presumedly has more experience appealing to “swing voters” than does Huckabee, who was governor of the red state of Arkansas for more than two four-year terms (as the state’s lieutenant governor he had assumed a portion of the previous governor’s term in 1996 and then was elected as the state’s governor in 1998 and re-elected in 2002).

Huckabee, unlike Romney, never has had to play to an audience of voters who actually have two brain cells to rub together, and what plays well in Arkansas (cue the banjo) doesn’t play well nationwide, which Huckabee is going to discover.

There are other factors in Romney’s presidential loss in 2012 as well, such as the fact that it’s unlikely for an incumbent president running for re-election to lose his bid. Jimmy Carter’s loss in his re-election bid to Ronald Reagan in 1980, and George H.W. Bush’s loss in his 1992 re-election bid to Bill Clinton were some exceptions, not the rule. Even George W. Bush eked out a second term in 2004, with 50.7 percent of the popular vote. (Had Hurricane Katrina happened before the 2004 election, instead of the following year, I have no doubt that Gee Dubya would have been only a one-term president.)

Losing a presidential election much more often than not is the end of a politician’s presidential aspirations. Richard Nixon lost in 1960 to John F. Kennedy but then won the White House in 1968, but in my lifetime (I was born in 1968), this was the rare exception, not the rule. Since 1964, presidential election losers Barry Goldwater, Hubert Humphrey, George McGovern, Gerald Ford, Jimmy Carter, Walter Mondale, Michael Dukakis, George H.W. Bush, Bob Dole, Al Gore, John Kerry and John McCainosaurus did not, have not or (probably) never will run for president again.

So you would think that members of the Repugnican (Tea) Party would prefer to sit 2012 out, given the uphill battle, but Romney and Huckabee have been out of elected office for a while now, and they probably don’t want to risk becoming more obscure over the course of another four more years, only to possibly be replaced in popularity in 2016 by an upstart (say, New Jersey Gov. Chris Christie or Ohio Gov. John Kasich or Indiana Gov. Mitch Daniels or maybe even Lousiana Gov. Bobby Jindal – and Mississippi Gov. Haley Barbour is termed out in 2012).

And, I suppose, the lure of the White House is just too appealing to too many egomaniacs, even if it’s a quixotic quest — even if, as in Mitt Romney’s case, rather than being the next Ronald Reagan (a title already claimed by Repugnican Tea Party Wisconsin Gov. Scott Walker), he’s much more likely to end up like the stiff and yawn-inducing Bob Dole did in 1996, losing to Bill Clinton by 8.5 percent of the popular vote.**

*While Romney is a deceptively youthful-looking [64 years old] and Huckabee actually is younger than Romney, at 55 years old, to me and to most other people, I surmise, Romney appears to be the younger of the two.

**Although, to be fair and balanced, I think it’s possible that Romney will lose to Obama in 2012 by a smaller margin than McCainosaurus did in 2008.

Advertisements

Leave a comment

Filed under Uncategorized

Mitt Romney: The next Bob Dole

Mitt Romney

Mitt Romney

Mitt Romney

Associated Press photos

Above: Repugnican Mitt Romney pontificates at the Conservative Political Action Conference in Washington, D.C., last month. Below: Failed 1996 Repugnican presidential candidate Bob Dole appears at a rally for Repugnican Tea Party nutjob Sarah Palin in Raleigh, N.C., in November 2008.

Bob Dole - Sarah Palin Campaigns In Raleigh Three Days Before Election

Getty Images

Repugnican Mitt Romney will be the 2012 Repugnican Tea Party presidential candidate. And he will lose to Barack Obama in November 2012.

Romney consistently appears in the top three favorites of Repugnican Tea Party members for the 2012 Repugnican Tea Party presidential nomination in recent nationwide polls. He usually ranks under Mike Huckabee but above Sarah Palin.

A Feb. 24-Feb. 28 NBC/Wall Street Journal poll, for instance, put Huckabee at 25 percent, Romney at 21 percent, has-been Newt Gingrich at 13 percent, and Palin at a measly 12 percent.

A Feb. 19-Feb. 20 Gallup poll put Huckabee at 18 percent, Romney at 16 percent, Palin also at 16 percent, and Gingrich at 9 percent.

Finally, a Feb. 12-Feb. 15 Newsweek/Daily Beast poll put Romney at 19 percent, Huckabee at 18 percent, and Palin at 10 percent.

It’s a safe bet, I think, to write off Palin and Gingrich (and anyone else) and to narrow it down to Romney and Huckabee.

Huckabee is doing only slightly better than is Romney in most polls, and the closer that we get to November 2012, the more the crotchety Huckabee will remind Repugnican Tea Party voters of 2008 presidential loser John McCainosaurus, I believe. Their angry, bitter, old white guy lost in November 2008 to the much younger (gasp!) black guy by 7 percent of the popular vote, and they don’t want a repeat of that, I’m sure.*

Huckabee’s latest trips are asserting falsely that Barack Obama grew up in his father’s homeland of Kenya (Obama actually grew up in Hawaii and in Indonesia [mostly in Hawaii] — doesn’t Huckabee pay attention to the birthers?) and that recent best-actress winner Natalie Portman is awful for being an unwed pregnant woman, quite reminiscent of Repugnican retard (that’s redundant…) Dan Quayle’s remark way back in 1992 that the fictitious television character of Murphy Brown, who on the TV show had had a child out of wedlock, was a horrible example for others.

Huckabee, a former Southern Baptist minister, is living in the distant past. The majority of Americans no longer give a shit whether a woman chooses to have a baby inside or outside of marriage. The majority of Americans correctly believe it to be the woman’s business and no one fucking else’s. (And they know that Barack Obama was not raised in Kenya.)

Romney, on the other hand, is expected to avoid social/culture-war issues in his quest for the White House and to emphasize the nation’s economic woes. After all, for him to emphasize social/culture-war issues would only emphasize the fact that he is a Mormon, which is troublesome not only for anti-theocratic progressives like me (I’m a gay progressive, so there’s no way in hell that I’d ever vote for an active Mormon), but for Huckabee’s base of non-Mormon “Christo”fascists, the majority of whom believe that Mormonism isn’t Christian.

Already Romney has coined his “Obama Misery Index,” which is predicated on convincing the majority of the American voters that we went right from Bill Clinton to Barack Obama — that the eight, long, nightmarish years of rule by the unelected BushCheneyCorp regime never fucking happened. (George W. Bush inherited a federal budget surplus from Bill Clinton but ended his two unelected terms with a record federal budget deficit.)

Romney also is parroting Repugnican icon Ronald Reagan’s “trickle-down” economics (even more tax breaks for the corporations will result in more jobs for Americans, Romney is lying), which never worked and which never will.

While Romney is launching a campaign of blatant fucking lies that the national economy was just fine until Barack Obama came along and that Romney has the solutions for our nation’s economic ills, Romney at least is focusing on what the majority of the 2012 voters care about: their pocketbooks (and not, say, Natalie Portman’s Murphy-Brown-like pregnancy).

And let’s face it: Romney is a lot more telegenic than is the wall-eyed Huckabee, too. In presidential (hell, in almost all) politics today, how you look matters. It should not, but it does.

Further, Romney inexplicably became governor of the blue state of Massachusetts (for one four-year term from 2003 to 2007), so he presumedly has more experience appealing to “swing voters” than does Huckabee, who was governor of the red state of Arkansas for more than two four-year terms (as the state’s lieutenant governor he had assumed a portion of the previous governor’s term in 1996 and then was elected as the state’s governor in 1998 and re-elected in 2002).  

Huckabee, unlike Romney, never has had to play to an audience of voters who actually have two brain cells to rub together, and what plays well in Arkansas (cue the banjo) doesn’t play well nationwide, which Huckabee is going to discover.

There are other factors in Romney’s presidential loss in 2012 as well, such as the fact that it’s unlikely for an incumbent president running for re-election to lose his bid. Jimmy Carter’s loss in his re-election bid to Ronald Reagan in 1980, and George H.W. Bush’s loss in his 1992 re-election bid to Bill Clinton were some exceptions, not the rule. Even George W. Bush eked out a second term in 2004, with 50.7 percent of the popular vote. (Had Hurricane Katrina happened before the 2004 election, instead of the following year, I have no doubt that Gee Dubya would have been only a one-term president.)

Losing a presidential election much more often than not is the end of a politician’s presidential aspirations. Richard Nixon lost in 1960 to John F. Kennedy but then won the White House in 1968, but in my lifetime (I was born in 1968), this was the rare exception, not the rule. Since 1964, presidential election losers Barry Goldwater, Hubert Humphrey, George McGovern, Gerald Ford, Jimmy Carter, Walter Mondale, Michael Dukakis, George H.W. Bush, Bob Dole, Al Gore, John Kerry and John McCainosaurus did not, have not or (probably) never will run for president again.

So you would think that members of the Repugnican (Tea) Party would prefer to sit 2012 out, given the uphill battle, but Romney and Huckabee have been out of elected office for a while now, and they probably don’t want to risk becoming more obscure over the course of another four more years, only to possibly be replaced in popularity in 2016 by an upstart (say, New Jersey Gov. Chris Christie or Ohio Gov. John Kasich or Indiana Gov. Mitch Daniels or maybe even Lousiana Gov. Bobby Jindal** — and Mississippi Gov. Haley Barbour is termed out in 2012). 

And, I suppose, the lure of the White House is just too appealing to too many egomaniacs, even if it’s a quixotic quest — even if, as in Mitt Romney’s case, rather than being the next Ronald Reagan (a title already claimed by Repugnican Tea Party Wisconsin Gov. Scott Walker), he’s much more likely to end up like the stiff and yawn-inducing Bob Dole did in 1996, losing to Bill Clinton by 8.5 percent of the popular vote.***

*While Romney is a deceptively youthful-looking 63 years old (and turns 64 in less than a week) and Huckabee actually is younger than Romney, at 55 years old, to me and to most other people, I surmise, Romney appears to be the younger of the two.

**While the Egypt-like battle in his state is ongoing, Wisconsin Gov. Scott Walker’s political future is, I believe, toast.

***Although, to be fair and balanced, I think it’s possible that Romney will lose to Obama in 2012 by a smaller margin than McCainosaurus did in 2008.

Leave a comment

Filed under Uncategorized

This is our BIG T-shirt moment!

T-shirt

The new Team Obama T-shirt is yours for a donation of $25 or more!

Confession: I purchased and I wore a white-lettered-on-black “got hope?” T-shirt before Barack Obama was elected in November 2008. In public. Repeatedly.

That was back when I had hope.

Now, Team Obama, I see from a shameless fundraising e-mail that I received today, is asking us to wear a T-shirt (pictured above) that reads: “WE DO BIG THINGS.” With the “BIG” really BIG.

“We do big things” comes right from Obama’s recent State of the Union address, of course. He ended his address thusly:

…We do big things.

From the earliest days of our founding, America has been the story of ordinary people who dare to dream. That’s how we win the future.

We are a nation that says, “I might not have a lot of money, but I have this great idea for a new company. I might not come from a family of college graduates, but I will be the first to get my degree. I might not know those people in trouble, but I think I can help them, and I need to try. I’m not sure how we’ll reach that better place beyond the horizon, but I know we’ll get there. I know we will.”

We do big things.

The idea of America endures. Our destiny remains our choice. And tonight, more than two centuries later, it is because of our people that our future is hopeful, our journey goes forward, and the state of our union is strong.

Thank you, God bless you and may God bless the United States of America.

Sadly, the State of the Union address apparently now is just a vehicle with which to roll out new empty slogans to slap on T-shirts and other campaign gear.

As I recently noted, “hope” and “change” — or, as Repugnican Tea Party queen Sarah Palin once put it, “that hopey-changey stuff” — doesn’t cut it anymore, so now we have “winning the future” and “we do big things.” (Palin once again has mocked the shameless sloganeering, pointing out that “winning the future” would be “WTF.”

What we have with Team Obama, unfortunately, is marketing slogans, not presidential leadership. (And when Sarah “Inflammatory Political Rhetoric Endangers No One But Your Inflammatory Political Rhetoric Endangers Me” Palin is making valid criticisms of you, you’re in trouble.) 

Worst of all where Obama’s 2011 State of the Union address is concerned, the state of our union is not strong, and Obama has neither the stomach nor the balls to seriously confront what I see as the nation’s three main problems (not in a particular order):

  • Corporateers whose tentacles now reach into every imaginable aspect of our lives and who won’t stop until they privatize absofuckinglutely everything — and who would charge us for the very air that we breathe if they could.
  • War profiteers and others within the military-industrial complex who keep us at perpetual war for perpetual war profiteering. (The members of the Repugnican Tea Party were fine with the BushCheneyCorp’s runaway government spending because it benefited the war profiteers, but any government spending on the people — having the audacity to use the people’s money to benefit them — the ringleaders of the Repugnican Tea Party cannot abide.)
  • Millions of baby boomers who are poised to wipe out Social Security and Medicare and other resources, leaving nothing for those who follow them.

These are powerful, intertwined lobbies, and without standing up to these lobbies, there is no solving the nation’s real problems — such as the federal budget deficit, which is caused by runaway spending by the military-industrial complex (with all of its corporate contractor cronies) and by treasonous tax evasion by the corporateers and the super-rich, and climate change, which many if not most of the boomers don’t care about because they figure that the worst of it will come after their lifetimes, and about which the polluting corporations don’t give a shit, because they put their profits far above both people and the very planet itself. 

But standing up to these lobbies Team Obama refuses to do. Team Obama would never offend the boomers or the corporateers and the war profiteers who are destroying the nation, as Team Obama wants their campaign contribution$ and their votes.

Instead, the members of Team Obama wax nostalgic about about “Sputnik moments” and “winning the future” — even while their staunch refusal to confront our real problems dooms our future.

We can’t “do BIG things” when we can’t even do the comparatively little things, such as provide our citizens with meaningful, well-compensated work (no, long stints as cannon fodder in the Middle East don’t count), decent health care that doesn’t put them into bankruptcy, and an affordable, quality college education free of the corporate student loan sharks and the textbook industry butt-rapists that surround our young people, viewing them only as victims to bleed dry. 

It’s enough to make one proclaim: WTF?

Leave a comment

Filed under Uncategorized

Giffords was on Palin’s hit list

In March 2010, Repugnican Tea Party queen Sarah Palin-Quayle put Democratic U.S. Rep. Gabrielle Giffords’ name on her hit list and indicated Giffords’ legislative district in Arizona with a graphic of gun crosshairs. Today, Giffords was shot in the head in Tucson.

We don’t know yet whether or not Jared Lee Loughner, the 22-year-old shooter of Democratic U.S. Rep. Gabrielle Giffords of Tucson, ever saw Repugnican Tea Party queen Sarah Palin-Quayle’s Facebook-page hit list — which, along with Palin-Quayle’s Tweeted advice to “Commonsense Conservatives & lovers of America: Don’t Retreat, Instead – RELOAD! Pls see my Facebook page” (which contained her mapped hit list as shown above), I wrote about in March.*

Clearly, however, there are plenty of mentally unstable among us who take such advice as to “RELOAD!” and who take such symbols as gun crosshairs over an elected official’s legislative district quite seriously.

Rep. Giffords is No. 4 on Palin-Quayle’s hit list. Giffords made the hit list because she’s a Democrat in a conservative congressional district who voted for the same health-care reform bill that the Repugnican Tea Party now is trying to repeal.

Of course, members of the Repugnican Tea Party, such as Palin-Quayle and Repugnican Tea Party House Speaker John Boehner, are falling over each other now to express their condolences for the violence that the Repugnican Tea Party condones — and their claims that of course the Repugnican Tea Party does not condone violence!

Fact is, once the idea is put out there, repeatedly, that it’s OK to commit violence against elected officials with whom one disagrees, it kind of doesn’t matter who exactly suggests it (such as Nevadan Repugnican Tea Party U.S. Senate candidate Sharron Angle’s suggestion that “Second-Amendment remedies” might be necessary for those elected officials who just won’t do what we want them to do) or who exactly the suggested targets are; it just contributes toward making the idea of shooting elected officials whom you don’t like the new norm.

They will deny their obvious complicity in actual acts of violence, as the fucking hypocrites never admit their wrongdoings, but those of us few Americans who still value what is left of what we call our “democracy” have to hold the feet of the members of the Repugnican Tea Party to the fire for the violence that they promote. (Figuratively. [For now.])

*In that post, titled “Bricks and Stones Can Start a Civil War,” I concluded:

Today, bricks — tomorrow, bullets?

It would be interesting to see what would happen in the aftermath of a “tea-baggin’” fascist actually assassinating someone, and I have to wonder if the question isn’t whether that will happen but when it will happen.

Hey, sign me up for the next civil war! I’ll be happy to fight for the blue states! This next time, though, we need to finish the job!

You betcha!

I still feel that way, by the way. I prefer bloodlessness, but if it’s a bloody civil war that the wingnuts want, I still say: Let’s give it to them!

Leave a comment

Filed under Uncategorized

Palin-Quayle on God, guns ’n’ grizzlies

Former Alaska Governor and 2008 Republican vice ...

Sarah Palin

Sarah Palin

Associated Press and Reuters photos

The 46-year-old Sarah Palin-Quayle pontificates in front of the National Rifle Association’s annual convention yesterday just before its cross-burning ceremony. Palin-Quayle’s juvenile, Valley-girl-like word choice, intonation and body language should come as no surprise, given that her main means of political communication is Twitter.

I would say that the 2008 presidential election never ended for Repugnican Sarah Palin-Quayle, who refuses to go the fuck away, but it’s more accurate, I think, to say that her 1984 beauty pageant never ended for her. Indeed, the former Miss Alaska pageant contestant (she lost that contest, too) reminds me of a former Miss California Carrie Prejean

— who has gone on to become a right-wing politician two decades from now, replete with the cross pendants

Sarah Palin

Associated Press photo

— that both Palin-Quayle and Prejean prominently publicly display as proof of their favor with God and Jesus.

Palin-Quayle is in the news yet again, telling the KKK-like National Rifle Association yesterday that surely President Barack Obama would ban guns if he could, and that it’s up to God’s warriors like she and the members of the NRA to prevent that God-awful scenario from happening.

Um, Jesus Christ probably would ban guns, but that’s another blog post…

Actually, Obama The Great Centrist never would ban guns* — he’s way too pussy to do anything radical — but the message that “President Sambo is a-gonna take away yer guns!” resonates well with the white-supremacist crowd that Grand Dragoness Palin-Quayle was addressing yesterday.

Probably even more ludicrous, though, than Palin-Quayle’s lie that the black president is after whitey’s arsenals is her assertion that she also made yesterday at another appearance that “mama grizzlies” — pissed-off Repugnican and other right-wing women, especially mothers, I’m guessing she means by “mama grizzlies” — are going to “rise up” and “take this country back.”

Aside from the fact that there aren’t enough far-right-wing women to hold a fucking Tupperware party, much less (much more?) take over the nation, I like the “mama grizzly” rhetoric, because this is what Palin-Quayle actually thinks should be done with grizzlies:

Yes, that is a photo of the wildlife-lovin’ Palin-Quayle in the governor’s office when she was governor of the Podunk State of the Great White North.

As Palin-Quayle is against women’s right to choose what to do with their own uteri, and supports the right wing’s subjugation of women in general, it is appropriate that she’s now blathering about her support of “mama grizzlies” when we have photographic evidence of the fact that she likes to pal around with grizzlies that have been slaughtered.

Indeed, like Cruella de Vil loved her Dalmation puppies, planning to make them into fur coats, Palin-Quayle thinks that mama grizzlies make great sofa covers.

You betcha.

P.S. Here’s a photo of Chatty Cathy Palin-Quayle at yet another event on Wednesday. I love the subtlety, don’t you?

Sarah Palin

Associated Press photo

*Indeed, The Associated Press notes:

Gun enthusiasts [that’s a nice, “professional” way of saying “gun nuts”] have trumpeted fears that their rights would erode under a Democrat-led White House and Congress, but President Barack Obama has largely been silent on issues such as reviving an assault weapons ban or strengthening background checks at gun shows. Obama also signed a law allowing people to carry loaded guns in national parks.

Leave a comment

Filed under Uncategorized

Sarah keeps earning ‘Palin-Quayle’

I was enjoying not blogging about Tea Party Princess/Queen Sarah Palin-Quayle for an entire week, I believe it had been until just now, but the “Family Guy” brouhaha has inspired me.

I don’t watch television (Hello, my name is Robert and I’m an Internet addict), but apparently a recent episode of the cartoon show “Family Guy” has a female character with Down’s Syndrome state, “My mom’s the former governor of Alaska.”

Of course fucktarded perma“victim” Sarah Palin-Quayle immediately got onto Facebook to denounce the latest liberal Hollywood swipe at her and her fucktarded family. A “kick in the gut” she called it. How about an actual kick in the gut?

But seriously, I read Palin-Quayle’s actual Facebook entry on this “controversy,” and, as the wingnuts like to do, Palin-Quayle tried to assert that satire that seems to have been aimed at her actually was aimed at her poor little retarded boy, whom she did such a great fucking favor by naming him Trig. [Yeah, give a mentally retarded kid a retarded namethat’s sure setting him off on the right foot in what’s going to be a tough life, isn’t it? As are toting him around like a prop for political points and using him as a political human shield.])

Anyway, I just wanted to note that I’ve long written it as “Sarah Palin-Quayle,” in homage to the dumbfuck Repugnican (I know, redundant) Dan Quayle, who was King George I’s vice president and who thought that you spell it as “potatoe.”

I feel vindicated, because besides the “potatoe” thing, Quayle is remembered also for his 1992 attack upon fictional TV character Murphy Brown. (That is a TV show that I did used to watch, and I loved it.) TIME Magazine reported at the time:

…[The] vice president dared to argue last week in a San Francisco speech that the Los Angeles riots were caused in part by a “poverty of values” that included the acceptance of unwed motherhood, as celebrated in popular culture by the CBS comedy series “Murphy Brown.”

The title character, a divorced news anchorwoman, got pregnant and chose to have the baby, a boy, who was delivered on last Monday’s episode, watched by 38 million Americans.

“It doesn’t help matters,” Quayle complained, when Brown, “a character who supposedly epitomizes today’s intelligent, highly paid professional woman” is portrayed as “mocking the importance of fathers, by bearing a child alone, and calling it just another ‘lifestyle choice.'”

Of course, these two incidents aren’t identical. Fucktard Dan Quayle seemed to not fully have understood that Murphy Brown was not a real person, and he is the one who picked the fight — with the fictional TV character. (If memory serves, the character of Murphy Brown, in a new episode that aired shortly after Quayle’s pronouncement, fairly hilariously responded to Quayle, albeit indirectly, if memory serves.)

In the more recent case, “Family Guy” drew the first blood, it’s true, but how presidential is it to be fighting with a fictional TV show — on Facebook?

I just don’t recall any member of the pantheon of great U.S. presidents having done anything like that…

I stand firmly by “Sarah Palin-Quayle.”

In her dumbfuckery, Sarah Palin-Quayle vindicates me constantly.

Leave a comment

Filed under Uncategorized

Sarah Palin-Quayle, grand dragoness

“Tea party” convention headliner Repugnican Sarah Palin-Quayle greets adoring supporters in an excellent PhotoShop job.

President-wannabe Sarah Palin-Quayle wrote this in a public relations — er, opinion — piece for USA Today before fellow radical-right Repugnican Tom Tancredo, a former U.S. representative from Colorado and former presidential hopeful who has used or at least tried to use xenophobic, anti-Latin-American-immigrant sentiment for personal political gain, opened the “National Tea Party Convention” in Nashville, Tenn., on Thursday:

Their vision is what drew me to the Tea Party movement. They believe in the same principles that guided my work in public service — whether I was working on the PTA and city council or serving as a mayor, commissioner or governor. I look forward to meeting some of these great Americans this weekend.

Probably at least in part because she’s no longer in public office, having quit her job as governor of Alaska before she served even one full term, Palin-Quayle apparently thought it sufficiently safe to appear at the Wingnut Super Bowl in Nashville today.

Other Repugnican elected officials who are still in office decided not to appear the “tea party” convention, afraid that some wingnut might say some really whack shit at the convention that would reflect poorly upon them. Or maybe the Repugnican National Committee made that decision for them.

In any case, some really whack shit was said at the convention, right off.

This is what Tancredo (who, like fellow wingnuts Samuel Alito and Antonin Scalia* [both U.S. Supreme Court “justices”], is an Italian American; now that their families got to immigrate to the U.S., we should hermetically seal our borders, you see) said in his opening speech for the convention on Thursday:

“…And then, something really odd happened, mostly because I think [that] we do not have a civics literacy test before people can vote in this country. [Big applause from his audience.] People who could not even spell the word “vote” or say it in English [more big applause] put a committed socialist ideologue in the White House — [his] name is Barack Hussein Obama.” [More applause.]

You can watch the clip on Rachel Maddow’s show here.

So Tancredo, who is able to say whatever he wants to say because his political career is dead anyway — really, you can’t be a one-trick hater-pony like he is and get anywhere — has bashed the 53 percent of Americans who voted for Barack Obama in 2008. He has alleged that because of low intellect and ignorance and/or a language barrier, Obama is our president.

That’s pretty fucking funny, since wingnuts are notorious for being fucktards. Like this one:

(I should note that I Googled “get a brain morans,” and from what I can tell, the viral images of the white-trash fucktard with that sign apparently are authentic images of an authentic wingnut.**)

And, as I noted waaaaay back in 2002, the same fucktarded haters who call for a “civics literacy test” (actually, “civics test” is just fine; there is no need to add the word “literacy” in there) for those from other nations (usually from nations within Latin America, since their skin usually is brown) or even for fellow American citizens (that is, black Americans) could not pass the same fucking civics test that immigrants must pass to become an American citizen. (Seriously — see how many of the questions you can answer correctly yourself!)

Knowing his background, Tancredo’s hateful remarks yesterday most likely were aimed, at least primarily, at those from Latin America who want a better life, but his remarks are reminding those who know their U.S. history of the literacy tests that once were used to prevent black Americans from voting. Notes Wikipedia:

As used by the states, the literacy test gained infamy as a means for denying suffrage to African Americans. Adopted by a number of Southern states, the literacy test was applied in a patently unfair manner, as it was used to disenfranchise many literate Southern blacks while allowing many illiterate Southern whites to vote.

The literacy test, combined with other discriminatory requirements, effectively disenfranchised the vast majority of African Americans in the South from the 1890s until the 1960s. Southern states abandoned the literacy test only when forced to by federal legislation in the 1960s…. Since the passage of the civil rights legislation of the 1960s, black registration in the South has increased dramatically.

So Repugnican former Sen. Trent Lott of Mississippi in 2002 publicly mused that the nation would have been a lot better off had segregationist Strom Thurmond been elected president in 1948, and now, Repugnican former Rep. Tom Tancredo muses that he sures misses the good old days of the literacy tests.

And, as I have noted before, calling Obama a “Muslim” or insinuating that he is a Muslim by stating his middle name of Hussein, is simply code for “nigger,” as is “socialist.” (“Committed socialist idealogue,” then, would mean “biiiiig nigger.”) And the name Hussein, of course, is associated with former Iraqi dictator Saddam Hussein, which is meant to associate Barack Obama with the “evildoers” of the Middle East. We whiteys are to be just as afraid of the niggers here as we are to be afraid of the sand niggers who hate us for our freedom, you see.)

But when you say that the “tea party” “movement” is all about (or at least largely about) white supremacism, the wingnuts crow that you’re wrong. But listen to the “tea party” convention crowd’s reaction to Tancredo’s racist, xenophobic clarion call for a “civics literacy test”; the crowd eats it up.

After Rachel Maddow shows the clip, she quips, “Although to be fair, it was sort of hard to tell exactly what the sounds coming from the crowd meant; they were sort of, a little bit muffled by the — you know, the white hoods.”

Yup. The “white hoods” joke is appropriate, but I believe that Maddow was kidding; it is clear from the clip that Tancredo had a doting audience, clapping and laughing and whooping in response to his comments.

So when Sarah Palin-Quayle, the keynote speaker of this weekend’s “National Tea Party Convention” in Nashville, gushes about the “tea party” “movement,” as she did in USA Today

Later this week I’ll head to Nashville, where I’ll have the honor of speaking with members of the “tea party” movement. I look forward to meeting many Americans who share a commitment to limited government, common sense and personal responsibility….

— it’s bullshit.

Things like “common sense” and “personal responsibility” and “limited government” are the “tea party” “movement’s” stated raison d’être (hey, look, this American who cast his vote for Barack Obama not only can spell the word “vote,” but he can mix it up with a foreign language sometimes, too!), and those things sure sound good — but the “tea party” actually is about white supremacism and patriarchy and misogyny and “Christo”fascism/theocracy and militarism (to spend any of our tax dollars on people instead of on war profiteers is deemed “socialist”) and xenophobia and jingoism and homophobia and ignorance and fear.

The “tea party” is comprised mostly of stupid, backasswards white men who can’t get over the fact that rapidly changing demographics in the United States of America are making it more and more impossible for the stupid white man to have the political control of the nation that he used to have.

There are some fucktarded white women, like Palin-Quayle, who support these fucktarded white men, but the “tea party” “movement” irrefutably is stupid-white-male driven. 

The “tea party” “movement” represents a small slice of the American electorate, and even that small slice is melting just like the polar ice caps are melting. Just as the “tea party” fucktards deny that the ice caps are melting, they seem to be in denial that their existence is endangered, too. They have become the dinosaurs that they don’t believe in.

So you have the “National Tea Party Convention’s” opening act, Tom Tancredo, call for a “civics literacy test,” and you have Palin-Quayle gushing about how great the “tea party” “movement” is before she goes to Nashville to be the keynote speaker at their first national convention.

How can we not associate Palin-Quayle with the rest of what has gone on at the Wingnut Super Bowl this weekend when she herself has chosen to associate herself with it?

*Well, Scalia’s father was an immigrant from Sicily and his mother was born in the U.S. to Italian immigrants. (Sicily, Italy — close enough…) Alito’s father was an immigrant from Italy. Wikipedia says of Tancredo, “Both sets of his grandparents emigrated from Italy.”

So it was OK to let all of these Italians and Sicilians into the United States, you see, but we need to keep the Latin Americans, especially the brown-skinned ones, out.

**I cannot vouch for the authenticity of this image, however:

Respect Are Country - Speak English

2 Comments

Filed under Uncategorized