Tag Archives: Ted Kennedy

Oh, yeah. Liz is running for prez.

Getty Images photo

U.S. Sen. Elizabeth Warren of Massachusetts is shown with U.S. Sen. Bernie Sanders of Vermont in the background. Today Warren released an apparent pre-presidential campaign video that lays waste to years of Repugnicans’ lies about her.

Today U.S. Sen. Elizabeth Warren of Massachusetts, in a rather brilliant video that as of this writing has had more than 1.6 million views, announced the result of a DNA test that shows Native American genes in her lineage.

The video also features snippets of interviews with individuals stating that her ever having indicated that she has Native American blood never was a factor in her hiring to teach at Harvard Law School and at other law schools; besides “President” Pussygrabber repeatedly offensively calling Warren “Pocahontas” (and daring her to get a DNA test), Repugnicans (starting with her 2012 opponent for the U.S. Senate, Scott Brown) for years have claimed that she lied about her background in order to give her an unfair advantage in the workplace.

The “Pocahontas” bullshit already has been dismissed by the majority of the voters of Massachusetts, who in 2012 elected Warren as the first woman to serve in the U.S. Senate for the state. She beat Brown with 53.7 percent of the vote, pushing him out of the Senate after he’d “served” there for only two years after the death of Sen. Ted Kennedy, and I expect her to do even better in next month’s election.

Therefore, Warren had nothing to prove to the voters of Massachusetts, and so I can’t help but think that Warren, anticipating the “Pocahontas” bullshit as the Repugnicans’ main criticism of her — and it’s pretty fucking lame and fucking juvenile criticism — is running for president in 2020.

I’m already committed to Bernie Sanders should he run again, but if he doesn’t, then Liz is my candidate. I cannot support Joe Biden or Cory Booker or Kamala Harris or anyone else over Bernie or Liz. Just can’t and won’t. Not in the primary season, anyway.

Anyway, don’t get me wrong. For me, anyway, it’s not about Elizabeth Warren’s heritage. I mean, I’m sure that it’s important to her, but I personally don’t care how much Native American blood she has coursing through her veins.

I care that she fights back against the Repugnican liars and traitors among us and does so effectively, something that the Democrats too rarely do. But more than that, I care that Warren truly cares about socioeconomic justice. It’s her No. 1 concern, and it’s long past time that we elect a president who makes socioeconomic justice the centerpiece of his — or her — administration.

Our first female president being the second coming of FDR would be more than just fine with me.

P.S. In Warren’s video, her family members call her Betsy, which is the first I’ve heard of that moniker for her.

And although Pussygrabber said on camera at one of  his KKK rallies in July that he’d give $1 million to Warren’s favorite charity if she took a DNA test “and it shows [that she is] an Indian,” I’m sure that he’ll weasel out of it by saying that she’s not Native American enough. He is, after all, a fucking liar; he even denied today that he ever made that statement, even though it’s on fucking video.

Reportedly the Cherokee Nation isn’t pleased that Warren had the DNA test done, but not only did Pussygrabber dare her to do it and promise to give her $1 million to her favorite charity if she did, but the charity that Warren picked is the National Indigenous Women’s Resource Center.

Advertisements

Leave a comment

Filed under Uncategorized

Andrew Breitbart goes to hell

FILE - In a Wednesday, Oct. 21, 2009 file photo, Andrew Breitbart attends a news conference, at the National Press Club in Washington. Breitbart, who was behind investigations that led to the resignations of former Rep. Anthony Weiner and former Agriculture Department official Shirley Sherrod, died Thursday, March 1, 2012 in Los Angeles. He was 43. (AP Photo/Haraz N. Ghanbari, File)

Associated Press photo

Wingnut Andrew Breitbart died today, and I celebrated the news. (The racist, right-wing fascist is shown above in October 2009.) Breitbart and I had some things in common — he was a white man with blue eyes, and so am I, and he keeled over at age 43 (I’d thought that he at least was pushing 50), while I just turned 44 yesterday — but that’s all that he and I had in common.

Why do people act as though people who were major assholes in life suddenly somehow become angelic in death?

Wingnutty slanderer and white supremacist Andrew Breitbart, whom I always thought of as Archie Bunker Jr., was a piece of shit who, long before he reportedly died this morning, should have donated his organs to someone else who could have made much, much better use of them.

Breitbart kicked the bucket just a day after my birthday, but it was a great belated birthday gift nonethless; truly, when I read the headline this morning, I was elated. Breitbart and his kind seldom seem to die young, but seem to live forever, fueled by their spite (Pope Palpatine comes to mind).

When evil people like Andrew Breitbart do die young, it’s a boon to humanity. Statistically speaking, Breitbart could have lived to do even more damage for more than the next 20 years.

Andrew Breitbart was not, as Texas Gov. Prick Perry said of him, a “mighty warrior!” (Sarah Palin also called Breitbart a “warrior.”) Breitbart was a fucking liar and a fucking coward, a self-serving race-baiter and scandal-monger without whom the world is much better off.

Breitbart’s crimes against decency and morality were many, but probably his worst crime was his selective editing of the video of a speech that former U.S. Department of Agriculture employee Shirley Sherrod gave at an NAACP fundraising dinner in March 2010.

Breitbart’s selective editing of the speech made Sherrod, who is black, look like an anti-white racist, when, in fact, her speech was about the evil of all forms of racism. Sherrod, who knee-jerkedly was fired by the beyond-pathetic Obama administration before she had received anything like due process — the Obama administration, apparently terrified of being accused of favoring black Americans, loves to throw black Americans like Sherrod and Van Jones under the bus at the very first whiff of a hint of an impending lynching by the KKK — sued Breitbart for defamation last year. The slanderer croaked before the defamation suit could run its course through the court system.

Breitbart was also known for having brought the world lurid images of former Democratic U.S. Rep. Anthony Weiner, who resigned as a result of the petty sex scandal that should not have been the end of his political career. (Weiner did nothing illegal, and the matter was between him and his wife, but the craven Democrats [well, DINOs] in D.C. couldn’t distance themselves from him enough. This was yet another instance of Democratic caving in to the right-wing fascists.)

Those are the two things that Andrew Fucking Breitbart was most known for: slandering Shirley Sherrod as a whitey-hating racist and exposing Anthony Weiner’s wiener. Yeah, that’s the stuff of a “mighty warrior!”

Really, if Prick Perry and Sarah Palin are praising you, then you are one fucking worthless asshole.

Had Andrew Breitbart fought to improve the lives of the many, instead of to aggrandize himself, if he had fought the plutocratic powers that be instead of helped them to carry out their agenda in which the filthy rich few benefit at the expense of the many, then we could say that he was a “mighty warrior,” but again, he was no such thing; he was a pathetic fucking coward.

And before you leave some stupid fucking, wholly predictable comment slamming me for “speaking ill of the dead” or the like, know that Wikipedia notes that “In the hours immediately following Senator Ted Kennedy’s death, Breitbart called Kennedy a ‘villain,’ a ‘duplicitous bastard,’ a ‘prick’ and ‘a special pile of human excrement.'”

Some “mighty warrior,” indeed. Andrew Breitbart in death deserves no better than what he gave in life.

And, unfortunately, it’s not just his fellow KKK members who are proclaiming nice things about Breitbart. The hypocritical millionairess Arianna Huffington, the pampered princess who fancies herself a progressive who stands up for the little guy against the “pigs at the trough” even though she raked in millions of dollars on the backs of unpaid writers for her website The Huffington Post, gushed:

“I was asked many times this morning for my thoughts on what Andrew meant to the political world, but all I can think of at the moment is what Andrew meant to me as a friend, starting from when we worked together — his passion, his exuberance, his fearlessness. And above all, what I’m thinking of at the moment is his amazing wife Susie and their four beautiful young children. My love and thoughts are with them right now.”

Fuck you, Arianna. You could have just kept your mouth shut. (Many if not most evil people throughout history have had families — that simple fact doesn’t make them and their deeds any less evil.)

That Huffington calls Breitbart a “friend” — indeed, I think, we can judge people by the company they keep.

Anyway, now, if James O’Keefe would just die…

Leave a comment

Filed under Uncategorized

Palin and the ‘common sense’ threat

Conservative superstar Sarah Palin, seen here in 2009, came ...

AFP photo

Progressives don’t know what to think of Tea Party Princess/Queen Sarah Palin-Quayle.

“Sarah Palin: Still not going to be president,” declares one progressive blogger, noting that Palin-Quayle’s favorability rating is only 37 percent and that more than 70 percent of Americans polled believe, correctly, that she isn’t qualified to be president of the United States of America.

But don’t count Sarah Palin-Quayle out, says another progressive blogger:

Underestimating her ability to manipulate [the masses] harks back to when we assumed that  Al Gore would win the election against George W. Bush.  We were that complacent.  Couldn’t we meander into that stupor once again?

Yes, we could.

If Ted Kennedy’s seat could be lost to a Repugnican due to Democratic complacency, just as complacency allowed the BushCheneyCorp to steal the White House in late 2000, then yes, we could see another “President” George W. Bush.

Easily.

Sarah Palin-Quayle, who has filled the dumbfuck vacuum that George W. Bush left, makes dumb people feel good about being dumb.

Fuck those eggheads! is Palin-Quayle’s rallying cry. (After all, she is the No. 1 defender of the mentally retarded…)

It’s all about “common sense,” Palin-Quayle frequently proclaims.

“Common sense.”

Sounds great, but what “common sense” means is that whatever a significant number of ignorant Americans believe to be true must be true. If a large enough number of Americans believe that Iraq was responsible for 9/11 and possesses weapons of mass destruction — justifying some “shock and awe” and “regime change” and “liberation” — then it must be true! The masses can’t be wrong!

If common sense is really so fucking great, though, then why don’t we allow people with great common sense to become physicians without having to bother to go through medical school? Why can’t those who possess great common sense skip that whole law school crap and just start practicing law? (Judge Judy — isn’t she all about common sense?) Even blue-collar workers, such as auto mechanics and construction workers, have to obtain training and often, if not usually, some sort of license or certification; they can’t coast on common sense alone (although “Joe the Plumber” might be an exception; did he ever get his plumber’s license?).

If your grandma or your neighbor or your postal carrier has great common sense, fine, but don’t we want our political leaders — especially those whose decisions could get us into World War III — to possess more qualifications than “common sense”?

But George W. Bush and Sarah Palin-Quayle and their ilk vicariously fulfill the fantasy of the members of the dumbfuck crowd that they, too, could reach the pinnacle of political power even though they have achieved little to nothing and even though they have no qualifications whatsofuckingever for such a lofty post.

It’s just like winning the lottery — Goddess knows that you didn’t earn it, but suddenly you have all of this money and power! It’s a dream come true!

We progressives misunderestimate (as “President” Bush would have put it) the seductiveness of Sarah Palin-Quayle’s appeal to the lowest common denominator at our own — and at our nation’s — peril.

The best-case scenario would be that Palin-Quayle decides that she would rather reign in hell than serve in heaven and that she therefore launches a third-party or “tea-party” bid for president in 2012, splitting the Repugnican vote — much like how third-party candidate Ross Perot siphoned Repugnican votes from Pappy Bush in 1992, handing the White House to Democrat Bill Clinton with only a plurality of the votes.

But we can’t count on that to happen.

The Repugnicans might, just might, actually rally around Palin-Quayle, if they are that desperate, and if the economy hasn’t improved by then — and the Repugnican minority in Congress is doing its damnedest to ensure that the economy doesn’t improve, in order to damage the Obama administration and the Democratic Party at the ballot box — we could have another very close presidential election, this time between Barack Obama and Sarah Palin-Quayle in 2012. Shit, it might even come down to Florida again.

How do you think the current U.S. Supreme Court would decide that one?

“The fawning of [Palin-Quayle’s] fan base is loud,” notes the aforementioned blogger. “They make more noise than the rest of us.”

Isn’t that exactly what happened in late 2000? That they had lost but that they made more noise than did the rest of us?

Leave a comment

Filed under Uncategorized

Maybe Martha Coakley should lose

Former President Bill Clinton, left, clasps hands with Martha ...

Massachusetts Attorney General Martha Coakley (L) speaks to ...

Associated Press and Reuters photos

Democratic Party heavyweights like Bill Clinton and John Kerry have campaigned for Massachusetts Attorney General Martha Coakley to succeed the late Ted Kennedy in the U.S. Senate. Her defeat in the special election for Kennedy’s seat on Tuesday would be an embarrassing blow to the party.

In the photos that I’ve seen of her, Massachusetts Attorney General Martha Coakley, who as the Democrats’ hand-picked would-be successor to the late Ted Kennedy is in a tight special election to fill Kennedy’s seat on Tuesday, looks nice enough. Nice enough that I gave her $10, even though I live on the Left Coast, in California. (It was U.S. Sen. Al Franken’s fundraising e-mail that induced me to give her any money at all, as I like Al.)

But I can’t help but wonder, as the fundraising e-mails for Coakley flood my two e-mail addresses’ inboxes, why the special election is so tight.

Ted Kennedy served in the U.S. Senate for Massachusetts from November 1962 to his death in August — longer than I’ve been on the planet, and I’ve been on the planet for a little more than four decades.

John Kerry, the now-senior U.S. senator from Massachusetts, has been in the Senate since January 1985 — for 25 years now.

Could it be that the Democrats have taken the Democratic votes of the people of Massachusetts for granted for waaay too fucking long now?

Could that be why the Dems need to scramble now to ensure that they don’t see an embarrassing defeat on Tuesday — because (at least in Massachusetts) they got too cocky, too complacent, too sure of themselves?

For the most part, no, I don’t want to see Coakley lose on Tuesday. I know how the mainstream media love to spin just one fucking election result: COAKLEY LOSES TED KENNEDY’S SEAT! THE DEMOCRATIC PARTY IS DEAD! It’s not accurate, but it’s dramatic and sensationalistic, so that’s how the media handle shit like that, and people who don’t know any better then parrot it.

Nor by a Coakley defeat do I want the Repugnicans to feel emboldened going into the 2010 mid-term elections. After a Coakley defeat the mainstream media headlines would say that, too: NATION SWINGS BACK TO THE GOP! 

But what if Coakley’s defeat would make the Democratic Party stop taking its base for granted?

What if?

For years now the Democratic Party has been great about hitting its supporters up for $$$, but not so great about actually delivering upon its promises in exchange for that $$$. We’ve given the Democratic Party a lot of our change, but we haven’t seen much of that promised change in return.

If Coakley’s defeat would make the Democrats actually start delivering the promised hope and change, then maybe her defeat would be worth it.

Still, again, I am cautious to assert that apparent voter discontent in Massachusetts is indicative of the national sentiment more than it actually is. I think that the mainstream mass media and mainstream-mass-media-consuming Americans in general tend to assert incorrectly that a regional or local election is indicative of a national trend.

Still, I love what 2004 Democratic presidential contender and former Democratic Party head (February 2005-January 2009) Howard Dean has to say about what’s going on right now. Reports The Associated Press today:

Washington – The ill winds of an angry electorate are blowing against Democrats, the warning signs clear in a closer-than-expected Massachusetts [U.S.] Senate race that may doom President Barack Obama’s health care agenda and foreshadow the party’s election prospects this fall.

[Again, I disagree that Massachusetts necessarily reflects the national mood; I could be that the voters of Massachusetts are just sick and tired of having the same political dysnasty, including its hand-picked successors like Coakley, running the show for several decades now.]

Anti-incumbent, anti-establishment sentiment is rampant. Independents are leaving Obama. Republicans are energized. Democrats are subdued. None of it bodes well for the party in power.

“It’s going to be a hard November for Democrats,” Howard Dean, the Democratic Party chairman in the 2006 and 2008 elections when the party took control of the White House and Congress, told The Associated Press in an interview. “Our base is demoralized.” [Emphasis mine.]

While he praised Obama as a good president, Dean said the Democrat hasn’t turned out to be the “change agent” the party thought it elected, and voters who supported Democrats in back-to-back elections now are turned off. Said Dean: “They really thought the revolution was at hand but it wasn’t, and now they’re getting the back of the hand.” [Emphasis mine.] …

Oh, shit, Howie, tell us how you really feel!

But seriously, I appreciate Howard Dean’s candor. Democratic Party hacks — you know, the fucktards who can defend even Billary Clinton, just because Billary calls itself a “Democrat” — will blast Dean for stating that President Barack Obama hasn’t been the “change agent” that he promised to be, but fuck, Dean was only speaking the obvious truth.

I really have to wonder now if Dean — who no doubt is deeply disappointed that Obama campaigned for the White House like a Howard Dean but now is presiding like a Billary Clinton — is angling for another run at the presidency.

You know, when Dean was head of the Democratic Party, the party did retake first the U.S. House of Representatives (giving us the nation’s first female speaker of the House), the U.S. Senate, the majority of the governorships and the majority of the state legislatures in 2006, and then retook the White House in 2008, while increasing its majorities in the U.S. House and the U.S. Senate as well.

That’s not bad!

The Democratic Party hacks who oppose Dean might actually claim that the nation was going that way anyway, but I give Dean the credit where the credit is due; God knows that the clueless establishmentarian, Billary-lovin’ Democrats couldn’t have done it on their own.

Should Dean actually oppose Obama in 2012 — an unlikely but not impossible scenario — then Dean has my support. If not in 2012, then maybe in 2016.

In the meantime, Tuesday’s special election in Massachusetts should prove to be interesting.

Leave a comment

Filed under Uncategorized