Category: attack of the wuss

Right hand up and repeat after me: Fuck Texas Judges

Of course Your Honor will stay. But you really need to go.

Donald Trump’s election looms over a U.S. citizenship ceremony in San Antonio, as the judge presiding over the ceremony says if you don’t like that Trump will be president, go to another country.

“I can assure you that whether you voted for him or you did not vote for him, if you are a citizen of the United States, he is your president,” Judge John Primomo said. “He will be your president and if you do not like that, you need to go to another country.”

Now that you’ve become a U.S. citizen, now that you’re even more like the other 50-something percent of us who despise racism, misogyny and wholesale fuckishness, you need to leave. You need to abandon your family and your precious dreams. Because Judge Primomo’s name popped up on on the roster for weekend duties.

The room at the Institute of Texan Cultures Thursday night was a melting pot, a collection of hopeful faces…

Taco Bueno. It was a Taco Bueno.

“I detest that, because you can protest things that happen in this country; you have every right to,” Judge Primomo said. “You don’t do that by offending national symbols like the national anthem and the flag of the United States.”

I hate when rioters don’t come with chips and salsa. And I love a good chalupa, not that anybody bothered to asked me. Why don’t you people think about somebody other than yourselves? Why not ask us what we want every once in awhile? I could really go for a protest, shoot.

Share

Good n’ Evil: Randian Tales of Two Presidents

The Glibertarian stinkpods over at Ricochet have some last minute advice on how to make excuses for yourself while voting for Donald Trump. Even if you aren’t some sort of pathetic racist traitor it’s worth a read, for the feigning ‘I suppose I could be wrong,’ and for the usual laughs. I mean really, as if anyone thought Ayn Rand wouldn’t fall down at The Donald’s knees and start tugging at his belt the moment she met him.

Who knows what the courts will do if the Democrats can get a commanding majority on the Supreme Court? We have already had all sorts of madness shoved down our throats by those who legislate from the bench. If you think that it has gone about as far as it goes, you do not know today’s Democratic Party.

Paul Rahe’s point is that a U.S. President is powerful. So powerful in fact that you can’t allow him to be a lady Democrat, who of course will be verklempt and empathetic, and will probably put an emo hack on the Supreme Court thereby making it even harder for Paul and his pals to beat the fags in a back alley on a Saturday night. If there’s one thing we mustn’t tolerate, it’s a loopy leftist who will “legislate from the bench.” Huh? Yeah.

Can we tolerate “racist, sexist, homophobic, xenophobic, Islamophobic” speech — speech that is “deplorable and irredeemable,” that is “negative, dark, and divisive with a dangerous vision?” Surely, surely not. And this would be easy. If we can punish the “hate” in “hate crimes,” why not punish it or outlaw it in speech? All that you have to do is to “reinterpret” the First Amendment.

Which, of course, any woman would do. You therefore have no choice but to vote for Donald Trump.

Even though he’s a monster? Even so, Paul tells us, Donald Trump is your only choice. He argues, compellingly: Think about it. Use your brain. How important is a “president” anyway? It’s not as if one person could screw the whole country up.

On Tuesday, you will not be getting married; you will not be choosing a pastor; you will not be joining a church; and you will not be choosing a hero. You will not be doing anything that might leave you with morally dirty or morally clean hands. You will be doing something much more prosaic — something akin to hiring someone to mow your lawn.

No big deal. Like you were hiring the kid next door. On the other hand, if you vote for Hillary Clinton?

The current generation — well represented by our current President — have forgotten just how fragile the international order is. In Europe right now and in the Pacific — thanks in large part to Barack Obama — that order is rapidly coming apart. The last time this happened it cost us hundreds of thousands of lives and treasure beyond imagination. This time, if this happens, it will be worse.

Thousands of corpses. Worse than that, wow. Then again, you can vote for Donald Trump.

You will be hiring someone to do for you what you do not have the time or the other resources to do for yourself. And, just as you customarily do when you hire someone to mow the lawn, you should — in this situation also — prudently calculate which of the candidates for the job will do the least damage and the most good…

Okay! But remember, there is still Hillary Clinton.

…we now live in very dangerous times — times dangerous for our republic, as I argue; and times dangerous for our nation, as Jeremy and John argue.

You can, of course, turn your back on the whole thing — you can stay home or line up with Jill Stein, Gary Johnson, or Evan McMullin. That would, however, be a cop-out… For to throw your vote away in a time of national crisis is to dodge your duty as a citizen.

But then there’s Donald Trump!

He is an entertainer — a reality show dramatist — and he is very good at venting the frustrations that have many of our fellow citizens in their grip…and he gave a speech on foreign affairs at Gettysburg not long ago that was positively sane.

There are times he seems completely sane. Heck, what else do you need to know? Hitler was nothing like that, I can tell you.

So to sum it all up. Upon being elected, one of these candidates will immediately transmogrify into Satan herself. The other candidate, however, is bound to fetch whatever you throw in the sideyard then come back and lick your face. What’s with all the confusion?

…if we go wrong on those matters, there is no road back short of revolution. If Hillary Clinton wins on Tuesday, the odds are good that she, her party, and their friends in the judiciary will shut the system down (as they already have in our universities). Whatever defects Donald Trump has (and they are legion), he will not do that; and, even if he wanted to, he would not be able to. Presidents, on their own, are not that powerful, and The Donald will be very much on his own.

Got that? Should she win on Tuesday, an empowered Hillary Clinton will surely “shut the system down (as they already have in our universities).” Thankfully, though, you have a choice. President Donald Trump “will not do that; and, even if he wanted to, he would not be able to.” And why is that? Because, silly: “Presidents, on their own, are not that powerful.” I see.

God bless a Libertarian. The stupidest people on Earth.

Share

Scott Adams goes Lee Harvey Oswald (for Trump!)

Still rockin’ the Master Persuader hypothesis, or something, Randian uber-branding self promoter and neuro-audiologist Scott Adams checks in with us once again to tell us how Donald Trump is still…I don’t know…winning? Or losing but, c’mon, unfair?

As of today, Clinton has the superior persuasion strategy. Crook beats monster.

Is Hillary now the Master Persuader?

Reality isn’t a factor in this election, as per usual. If the truth mattered, voters might care that the Democratic primaries were rigged against Sanders. They might care that the Clinton Foundation looks like a pay-to-play scheme. They might care that the FBI gave Clinton a free pass.

Nasty woman! Lies. But I thought the whole point of persuasion was to convince people of your own point of view. Why would the Dark Mistress, Clinton, be spouting Trump’s talking points? I’m not sure Scott has thought this all the way through. And if “the truth mattered”, why would anyone care that “the Clinton Foundation looks like a pay-to-play scheme”? I mean, who cares what Dilbert’s pal thinks about it? When it’s really a pretty generous charity? Ooooh I get it – Scott is working the ole’ persuasion. Really very sneaky (…he be a certificated genius). We now return to the crypto-linguistic semiotics:

Clinton’s team of persuaders have successfully crafted Trump’s offensive language and hyperbole into an illusion that he’s a sexist/racist in some special way that is different from the average citizen. The reality is that everyone is a little bit sexist and a little bit racist. We’re all wired that way. There’s no escape if you are human.

As if Clintonistas were in the Access Hollywood bus back then. Waving guerilla cue cards at the defenseless Donald: ACT LIKE AN ASS. And SAY PUSSY LADIES LOVE THAT. Of course the candidate obliged, because he’s wired in a certain way, and he’s like all of us, only human, born to maaake mistaaaakes. Or in scientific terms: Cha-ching! persuasion, bitch.

I can’t change anyone’s mind if they see Trump as a monster. So instead I will make you a promise.

Scott made a case long ago that Trump is a 98% lock for the presidency, but the number has since shrunk about tenfold. He’s made little headway convincing America to go for his candidate. So now he’s going to try something different. Will you take him at his word?

My promise: If Trump gets elected, and he does anything that looks even slightly Hitler-ish in office, I will join the resistance movement and help kill him.

Vote Trump now, and Scott will assassinate him later.

Alright. I’m listening.

That’s an easy promise to make, and I hope my fellow citizens would use their Second Amendment rights to rise up and help me kill any Hitler-type person who rose to the top job in this country, no matter who it is.

OH, you nearly had me there. But getting somebody else to do your dirty work is a deal killer. If you’d been man enough to promise to blow Trump’s brains out, that would have been one thing. But hiding in the back of a pack of gun nuts and then ducking into a Starbucks at the first chance does not persuade me of the size of your balls. Which would have to be steely, and sizable, indeed, for me to vote for sex criminal Donald Trump. But you know. Nice try, cartoon boy.

Share

Donald Trump, sex criminal, blames the media and Media Man applauds him

I see Joe Concha at The Hill has a Hot Take on Donald Trump. Apparently there’s more to this unconventional candidate than you thought. It’s a shame you don’t pay closer attention to him, the way Joe does. But then you’re probably not a big media expert.

From a Trump rally in West Palm Beach, Fla., on Thursday:

“They [the media] are political special interest no different than any lobbyist or other financial entity with a total political agenda — and the agenda is not for you, it’s for themselves. Their agenda is to elect crooked Hillary Clinton at any cost, at any price, no matter how many lives they destroy. For them, it’s a war, and for them, nothing at all is out of bounds. This is a struggle for the survival of our nation. Believe me.”

Trump has a point there [literally: “Trump has a point with media criticism.”]. He does? Yes, he does, because apparently Concha isn’t typically bothered when a presidential candidate forces his hand up a random woman’s skirt and grabs her pussy. That sort of thing isn’t particularly relevant, or interesting. It’s nothing, or not much, more than when Clinton aides e-mail back and forth over evangelicals and Catholicism. Joe agrees with the GOP candidate and believes the real problem here is the media. And before you go ‘Huh?’, he’s got the data to back it up:

In viewing recordings by The Hill of each major network’s evening newscasts, which are watched by an average total of 22 million to 24 million people nightly, the newest batch of WikiLeaks revelations was covered for a combined 57 seconds out of 66 minutes of total air time on ABC, NBC and CBS.

Those leaked emails include derogatory comments about Catholics by senior Clinton campaign officials and more disturbing examples of collusion between the media and her campaign It’s newsworthy stuff) —

On the other hand, allegations from four women of unwanted sexual advances by Trump were covered a combined 23 minutes.

Add it all up, and one presidential candidate’s negative news of the day was somehow covered more than 23 times more than another candidate’s negative news of the day.

Can you believe it? Trump, it turns out, is actually right. There are two juicy presidential candidate scandals competing for the nation’s attention here, but for some reason only one of them is getting any play. Trump’s little imbroglio is “somehow” receiving 23 times the coverage of the other. Obviously, this is the REAL scandal. Goodness, cancel CNN’s kangaroo court, and strike the MSNBC gallows. Also reserve a spot in the newsman Hall of Fame for Joe, everybody, or at least some space in the Murrow crypt.

Well, I don’t happen to agree. Call me partisan, or jaded, or just dumb – take your pick – but I have to say I was thoroughly disappointed with Joe, and his big media expose’. First, there’s this:

“Their agenda is to elect crooked Hillary Clinton at any cost, at any price, no matter how many lives they destroy. For them, it’s a war, and for them, nothing at all is out of bounds. This is a struggle for the survival of our nation. Believe me.”

One presidential candidate just accused CBS and the like of participating in a conspiracy so dangerous it has destroyed lives, and will destroy the country completely. Donald Trump declared categorically that unless he’s the next president, the United States of America will cease to exist. You want a big scoop? A helluva story? There it is. Joe might want to do a little investigative journalism and see if that’s at all true. If it isn’t, Joe might follow up with a better-founded story focusing on how one of the candidates is a paranoid lunatic, or profoundly mentally ill.

Second, one of the candidates has been accused of serious wrongdoing [Trump]. One of them may be guilty of criminal sexual conduct in at least 10 cases, going back 30 years. One of them, realistically, probably assaulted a number of women in horrendous fashion. The other candidate may have had campaign staffers who e-mailed about how fundamentalists feel about other religions. Hillary Clinton likely hired people who offered their opinions about which sects evangelicals might favor. But let’s be forthright and fair to Journo Joe – these are both, absolutely, in fact, stories. They are also both, perhaps, newsworthy. The matter of whether one is obviously more newsworthy than the other is…not newsworthy? Silly me, I believe it is.

Third, from Joe:

Reaction to Trump’s critique of the media by many left-leaning media members and advocates was about what one would expect, referring to it as dangerous and dark and totalitarian and conspiratorial and just about every other word from the 2016 Hyperbole Style Guide. Those conclusions, of course, are just air without any real foundation in terms of numbers or data to support it.

Speaking of data, try this on for size…

And then Joe takes in the news, with one eye on his wristwatch, and exposes the mainstream media’s partisan ways. He shines a light on “dangerous and dark and totalitarian and conspiratorial” TV newshack hyperbole. Then he proclaims…I Am a Journalist. Concha has just exposed his fellow media members, and shown us that the nasty things being said about Donald Trump are “…just air without any real foundation in terms of numbers or data to support it.”

You don’t say, Joe. Ah but you did. Here, just this morning, were Matt Viser and Tracy Jan in the Boston Globe:

Trump’s campaign has taken a sharp turn toward such dark warnings in recent days. He says he is a victim of conspiracies, portrays himself as a martyr to the cause of the right wing, and is stoking anger in advance of what may be a defeat on Nov. 8.

My balls, right Joe? That’s just something these two hacks pulled out of their “2016 Hyperbole Style Guide.”

…some are even openly talking about violent rebellion and assassination, as fantastical and unhinged as that may seem.

“If she’s in office, I hope we can start a coup. She should be in prison or shot. That’s how I feel about it,” Dan Bowman, a 50-year-old contractor, said of Hillary Clinton, the Democratic nominee. “We’re going to have a revolution and take them out of office if that’s what it takes. There’s going to be a lot of bloodshed. But that’s what it’s going to take. . . . I would do whatever I can for my country.”

He then placed a Trump mask on his face and posed for pictures.

J-man? Well, but that’s just one person. Right. That’s not like a whole bunch of ‘data’. That’s nothing like our hero sitting on his couch and watching ABC News, peeking at the stopwatch on his iPhone.

“This is my prediction: Trump is going to win the popular vote by a landslide, and the Electoral College will elect Hillary, because of all the corruption,” he said. “Maybe it’ll all work and restore my faith in humanity. But I doubt it”…

“We’re going to have a lot of election fraud,” said Jeannine Bell Smith, 65-year-old longtime teacher in a red Trump shirt with a bucket of popcorn under her arm. “They are having illegals vote. In some states, you don’t need voter registration to vote.”

After a prayer is said and the national anthem sung, she leans in.

“We can’t have that lying bitch in the White House,” she said.

Oh boy, okay. That’s more than one person, that’s a couple. But that’s not as bad as the media! Those people are dangerous! They keep bringing up Donald’s faults as if he were a bad person!

“Trump said to watch your precincts. I’m going to go, for sure,” said Steve Webb, a 61-year-old carpenter from Fairfield, Ohio.

“I’ll look for . . . well, it’s called racial profiling. Mexicans. Syrians. People who can’t speak American,” he said. “I’m going to go right up behind them. I’ll do everything legally. I want to see if they are accountable. I’m not going to do anything illegal. I’m going to make them a little bit nervous.”

Some Trump supporters say that if he doesn’t win, they figure the United States government will be no better than dictatorships where elections cannot be trusted.

“We’re heading toward North Korea, without a doubt,” said Grant Reed, a Trump supporter wearing a shirt that said, “If you’re offended, I’ll help you pack.”

Joe Cecil, a 39-year-old restaurant manager, said he has never voted before but is newly inspired by Trump.

“If people are offended by the sexual stuff, what do they think is going to happen when Muslims come here, implement Sharia law, and start raping our women?” he asks.

How about that, media expert? Any questions? Or comments?

“I’ve heard people talk about a revolution. I’ve heard people talk about separation of states. I don’t even like to think about it. But I don’t think this movement is going away. We don’t have a voice anymore, and Donald Trump is giving us a voice.”

C’mon, man. To say, or to assume, that the two candidates are somehow the same is ridiculous. Such a thing would require a sane person – or a journalist – to be willfully fucked.

Donald is likely guilty of sexual assault, and here we are. He’s certainly guilty of inciting increasingly violent panic and paranoia in his followers, which won’t stop soon. That’s all newsworthy, very newsworthy, for many reasons (I can’t believe I have to type this). And if you’d like to perhaps hold a mirror up to the hacks in the media, Joe, there’s always the men’s room.

Share

Here’s your Saturday Evening Donald Trump is getting screwed because The Messicans HOT TAKE

Bless ole’ Ann Coulter. If she did not exist we would have to invent, then bust out laughing at, her.

Ssssizzling. Much-The-Same Ann ‘pro-Pussy Grabber’ Coulter: “This is an attempt to let millions of Messicans squat in my chifferobe because John McCuck won’t vote #NouveauKlan.”

Loosers! This has been…Saturday Evening with a HOT TAKE.

Share

Donald’s new thing: Hillary is ISIS

Once again the Trump campaign sets off in a brand new direction. It’s your all encompassing comprehensive re-set back to the beginning do-over everybody get the hell out and start pushing first-gear bump start, for the rest of the entire year, one more time. Watch:

SUNRISE, Florida — Donald Trump on Wednesday night admonished Hillary Clinton for having the father of the Orlando shooter seated behind her at a recent campaign rally.

“Wasn’t it terrible?” Trump asked, that Seddique Mateen was “sitting with a big smile on his face right behind Hillary Clinton … When you get those seats, you sort of know the campaign.”

As he did today, here, using Omar Mateen’s father, Donald Trump will try to tie Hillary Clinton to terrorism. He’s going to do everything he can to turn her into an angry Muslim set to wage jihad inside the United States. He’s going to swear, without a hint of sarcasm, that she’s associated with a well-known terrorist group.

“Take a look at Orlando. Take a look at San Bernardino. Take a look at the World Trade Center. Take a look at what’s going on, and then worldwide, and we let [Islamic State or IS, formerly] ISIS take this position,” the Republican presidential nominee said during an election rally in Daytona Beach, Florida. He drew a list of flaws in US policy in Libya and the Middle East, laying all the blame on his opponent, Clinton.

“It was Hillary Clinton that… she should get an award from them as the founder of ISIS. That’s what it was. Her weakness. Her weak policies,” the New York mogul stressed, with the crowd then responding with “Lock her up! Lock her up!”

This will be Trump’s campaign going forward. Hillary Clinton should get an award for founding the Islamic State. Nevermind that the Bush/Cheney cabal obviously deserve credit for the group considering its well-known roots in the Iraq War. Hillary Clinton is really to blame, and she’s very much sympathetic to their wishes. This is a meme he started two days ago.

Donald Trump labeled Democratic rival Hillary Clinton as the Islamic State in Iraq and Syria’s “most valuable player,” accusing her foreign policy of creating the terror group…

“We shouldn’t have gotten out the way we got out, the way we got out was insane. Obama gave a date and that’s how ISIS happened,” Trump said Tuesday at a rally in Wilmington, N.C.

“Hence the birth of ISIS, congratulation Hillary Clinton. If I’m ISIS, I call her up and I give her the most valuable player award.”

It will be interesting to see if this strategy will work against a candidate who is closely associated with the Obama administration. Clinton is his former Secretary of State. The President has killed more ISIS terrorists than all of the world’s other leaders combined.

Trump meanwhile has feuded bitterly with the Khan family, whose son, Humayun Khan, was killed in Iraq.

The newest issue of the so-called Islamic State’s propaganda magazine Dabiq said the Muslim war hero died as an “apostate” when he was killed by a car bomb in Iraq in 2004 after ordering soldiers under his command to stand back as he moved foward to investigate the vehicle.

Khan was posthumously awarded the Bronze Star and Purple Heart and is buried at Arlington National Cemetery. ISIS published a picture of his headstone and captioned it, “Beware of dying as an apostate.”

ISIS is no fan of Capt. Khan.

Share

Dean’s Troubles: Atheists, children and women.

I came upon this classic blog-rant on Memeorandum. The proprietor of Dean’s World gets plenty cheesed when people chide Catholics like him, even more so when they criticize the Church.

I’m sick of hearing bigots squawk about “Hitler’s Pope” and “ratlines” and “pedophile priests” and “being an enemy of science” and “burning Galileo” and “the Jesuits invented the modern Social Justice movement” or other gross distortions or outright fabrications.

Pointing out the mistreatment of Galileo or the timidity of Pius XII during the Holocaust is hurling bodily secretions (“spitting” and “crap”) in poor Dean’s direction so please refrain. Or else. This is not a request, this is your undoing.

Here’s the truth: the Catholic Church is almost certainly the least violent institution on the planet for anything close to its size and history–and in your heart you damn well know it, at least in terms of today’s Church.

It’s the least violent institution in all our history…at least in terms of today’s Church. The same could be said of today’s Charles Manson. Or of our contemporary plague.

And if you do any real investigating you’ll know it’s not just today’s Church; any reasonable analysis supports that Christianity brought peace throughout its history far more than it brought war and suffering and intolerance.

Dean’s ‘reasonable’ analysis: Formidable. Dean’s ‘factual’ analysis: Evanescent. Anyway here’s the screed’s big point:

Christians almost never live perfectly up to their ideals but the Church is inherently nonviolent–and honest people know this. What’s the Church ever really done to you except have ideas you don’t like? Or done something bad that couldn’t just as easily have been done by someone or something outside the Church?

To wit: “The Church is the largest and greatest institution in history, bringing us divinity, peace, art, science, and culture…but it’s only men.” Right, how could it be otherwise?

So Dean is playing the double-sided authoritarian. The pious and papists have all earned the power and influence they’ve accrued over the centuries – not to mention the thousands of billions in tithing and the planet’s greatest collection of art, some of it not merely stolen – but of course they’ve also raped children. Because c’mon, as if you wouldn’t do the same thing. Who did you think the Pope’s consorts were, a bunch of saints?

…NO, you [Christians] damn well don’t get special dispensation to tar innocent people if you were abused by someone within the Church. Innocents do not deserve to have you hold the crimes of others against them for all eternity. The Church leadership made mistakes. It was unbelievably painful. We owned it. Now how are Protestants doing with this issue?

Take that also-nauseating scumbags.

And, bigger question, for you smirking nonreligious secularists: what are you doing about the much bigger problem among government employees like teachers and female prison guards?

The first link there is a five point counter argument against kiddie-reaming being a Church thing, etc:

FACT: Catholic priests abuse at a rate far lower than that of other males in the general population.

Why can’t Percy the shut-in have the same shot at teaching Sunday school as Father Concepción? Hmm? The more relevant question would be ‘Is there some way he can dodge jail and keep his job, too?’ It’s also a relief to know that only four percent of the world’s 400,000 Catholic priests are pedophiles (phew). Jesus, I love data. That second link goes straight back to A Voice For Men, the bro’s rights activist sludge pit. Could it be that Dean’s World is run by the oh-so manly Dean Esmay?

dean-esmay

Sure.

Share

Carly Fiorina. Fuck Marry Kill.

There’s not much left for our nasty friend Carly Fiorina to do. Put up a brave face for the Fox News cameras and bid America ‘so long.’ Take the limo back to campaign headquarters. Turn off all the computers, close out all the accounts. Pick a kindly underling to issue all the Buh’Byes and shoo the rats out the door.

But silly, that’s not Carly!

Republican presidential candidate Carly Fiorina slammed Hillary Clinton — and her marriage — this morning on MSNBC.

“If my husband had done some of the things Bill Clinton had done, I would have left him long ago,” Fiorina said…

She’s going to hang around and trash the Clintons.

“Unlike another woman in this race, I actually love spending time with my husband,” Fiorina said.

She’s going to invent new ways to bring down her cursed enemies.

“Bill can sleep with all the fat interns he wants, but then I would never let him back in my bed. Are you kidding me?”

I have to say. This is breaking new ground politics-wise.

“And she’s like ‘What do I care?’ My gosh Chris, what’s that about? And Hillary thinks she’s qualified to be president!?”

Credit Ms. Fiorina for bringing ‘Fuck Marry Kill’ to the forefront of our presidential campaigns.

Of the many weird things about this, the weirdest might be that it makes nobody want to vote for candidate Carly Fiorina, Everyone’s Wife. This just makes people wonder about the Clintons. But then we’ve wondered about the Clintons since 1991 so…boring. Digby says:

The other day when the donor lists to various campaigns were revealed many noticed an odd curiosity about Fiorina’s donations. A pro-Cruz super PAC controlled by millionaire Robert Mercer (who had written checks for 5 million to Cruz’s effort) sent $500,0000 to Carly Fiorina’s super PAC. How often does it happen that a PAC for one candidate helps one of its rivals in a primary campaign? But New York Times reporter Amy Chozick cleared up the mystery when she tweeted:

“Fiorina finance chairs told me supporters of other candidates have thrown them $$$ to have a woman in race attacking HRC.”

Now that makes sense.

It appears that Carly Fiorina took half a million dollars to sleep with President Clinton. What a…ahem.

Share

Then he dug up a copy of Deep Throat on Vimeo

In the midst of all this naked racism and the popularity of its great Republican purveyor, sheesh…have you read Molly Ball’s piece in The Atlantic? This is sad.

“I remember seeing Muslims around the world celebrating after 9/11,” says Chip Matthews, a 63-year-old retired carpentry teacher in glasses with tinted lenses. So what if it was the Mideast and not New Jersey? “The basic point, I think, is true,” he says…

Barnhill, the man with the “balls” button, says, “Like he says, people have got to abide by the law. And unfortunately, a lot of minorities don’t.”

Donald is tapping into the worse angels of our nature.

“I’m against the anchor babies, and I’m against the Muslims,” says Kathy Parker, a tiny former elementary-school teacher with gold hoop earrings. “We can’t have churches in their countries—why should they have mosques in ours? He is the only one with the guts to speak out and say it.”

This Kathy person is essentially an anti-American. An anti-Constitutionalist. Anyway, in the midst of all this sinister stupidity I’m thankful today for the benign version.

Google deems Bernie Sanders’ economic plan a ‘phishing scam’

Over at Rev. Moon’s Washington Times, political reporter Stephen Dinan has got the Bernie Sanders campaign backed into a corner. The lede:

Democratic presidential hopeful Bernard Sanders’ economic plan triggered Gmail’s “phishing scam” antenna, with the mail system saying the senator’s liberal campaign promises — including lower prescription drug prices and free college for all — sound like frauds.

Forget the ‘who what when where’ of muck-raking journalism. All you need to do to break the next Watergate scandal is click a link in your e-mail and then watch what your computer does next.

“Be careful with this message. It contains content that’s typically used to steal personal information,” Gmail said in a bright red warning box that appeared at the top of a message sent by Mr. Sanders’ campaign Friday, laying out his “Agenda for Working Families.”

Is this Dinan good, or what? Most the rest of us would’ve started slapping our monitors, but he knew better. The Google is seeing right through your facade, Senator.

“A regression in the spam filter’s machine learning framework was determined to be the root cause. The issue affected only a very small percentage of the overall email received by Gmail and it has now been resolved,” the representative said.

Oops. That’s not it.

Ira Winkler, president of Secure Mentem and a cybersecurity specialist, said the campaign likely triggered Gmail’s filters because it included phrases that spammers use to try to sell prescription drugs and by offering things free of charge — in this case, the promise to pay for education at public colleges and universities.

There. THAT’S it. The corruption of debt-free education – whew, good thing Google caught it. Here’s the real-life screenshot Dinan provided:

sanders scam

So, you see? He wasn’t lying. This really did happen in his e-mail, the way he said it did. Meanwhile, after clicking on his SandersScam post, the multi-tentacled Moonie Times opened up three new browser windows in my box (not tabs – windows), including an offer to attend one of those ‘Rich Uncle, Poor Uncle’ seminars, which of course is in no way a scam. As is nothing and no one remotely associated with the Rev. Moon.

Share

Bristol: Imma bust you up ‘Bama

Have I got this straight? A race-revoltin’ development, Bristol Palin can hardly believe it:

In case you missed it. The President invited Ahmed Mohamed to visit the White House to show the President his homemade clock. The fourteen year old was arrested after someone reported that he was building a bomb.

This was after an ATF agent in line at a local Starbucks caught a whiff of ozone and the sound of ululating coming from a mosque next door. And when the Feds broke down the door, Ahmed turned around to face the raid and was, like, “FALAFEL?” and got himself arrested. Right, right?

OR was this Ahmed just a science-y fourteen year old high school kid? And when he brought his homemade clock to school the Palin-brained English teacher freaked out after hearing it go ‘boom‘ ‘beep’ in his backpack and had the nerd arrested? I’m sure you can all see this is just a simple misunderstanding, there’s no sense in calling anybody a ‘racist.’ Ahmed is an Arab, and a Muslim, and you know how those people like to show off their IEDs.

The “reported” bomber:

“No, I never said anything about, ‘I have a bomb,'” he added. “Never.” He said the interrogation “made me feel like I wasn’t human — it made me feel like a criminal.”…

Ahmed told the Morning News that when he was taken into the room for questioning, an officer said, “Yup. That’s who I thought it was.” Ahmed, whose family immigrated to the US from Sudan, said he started feeling self-conscious about his Muslim name and brown skin.

The officers reportedly asked him whether he tried to make a bomb. Ahmed said he told them it was just a clock. After the questioning, the police led Ahmed out of school in handcuffs.

The President read about it.

What a nice man, this Obama fellow. Oh right this is where Bristol Palin came in: What a baaaad man.

This is the kind of stuff Obama needs to STAY out of. This encourages more racial strife that is already going on with the “Black Lives Matter” crowd and encourages victimhood.

Here’s something Bristol knows a little about. This ‘controversy’ (pfft) is more like a rockin’ little house party that broke out into a brawl. The Palins are holding up their usual end of the deal, swinging away with the racists, and all the Muslim clock-makers are on the other side. Everyone is having a grand time beating the hell out of each other, with pieces of clothing and broken teeth flying everywhere, when all of a sudden Sheriff Obama pulls up and wants to shut it down. And here is Bristol screaming “STAY OUT OF THIS PAL” through her dress, which is now way up over her head after being dragged around like a sack of potatoes.

Share

To be as decent (or deadly) as Ruth Marcus

Sometime in September Congress will have to vote on Obama’s anti-nuke agreement with Iran. And the Republicans have been decent enough to tell us their innermost thoughts about that. They’ve pointed out the uncanny similarities between the president and Neville Chamberlain and guaranteed us the Jews will once again be marched to the ovens.

For the rest of us – including the treaty’s chief proponent – this is all B-movie stock and a little absurd and perhaps worthy of some eye-rolling. For WaPo columnist Ruth Marcus though the un-seriousness on our part pains her greatly and, we assume, prods her to raise her finger, wave it around at us and pointedly lecture this – dear, what shall we call him? – this “President.” And I think I speak for everyone when I say Thanks Ruth because I’m not sure where we’d be without the Stepford Wife of centrism.

President Obama says those who oppose the Iran nuclear deal are either ideological or illogical. I support the deal, yet I think this assessment is incorrect and unfair. It diminishes the president’s case for congressional approval.

In Marcusville, the burgeoning Beltway exurb, the making of pointed arguments diminishes whatever arguments you’re making. You might think it convenient for one to have “facts”, and you may be of the opinion they argue substantially for one’s “side”, but actually saying them out loud is hardly any way to practice politics. You never see Dwight Eisenhower behaving this way, do you? And let’s put aside that the general is long since dead and Ruth’s memory is obviously shot. Let’s instead just agree that she knows a ruffian when she sees one.

Obama once understood, even celebrated, this gray zone of difficult policy choices…

The new Obama, hardened and embittered — the one on display in his American University speech last week and in the follow-up spate of interviews — has close to zero tolerance for those who reach contrary conclusions.

It’s a hardened and embittered president who would disagree with someone trying to trash his treaty. Why can’t he be more soft and cuddly, this man? Why can’t he take a little time to understand and then perhaps even celebrate his opponents’ sensible objections?

“You have created a possible death sentence for Israel,” [Lindsey Graham] declared on MSNBC’s “Morning Joe.”

“This is a virtual declaration of war against Sunni Arabs,” he said.

“This is the most dangerous, irresponsible step I have ever seen in the history of watching the Mideast. Barack Obama, John Kerry, have been dangerously naive,” he added.

In this case, why can’t he say “I understand your criticism of my hard-won agreement Senator Graham. Which of course amounts to Fuck You, Barack. And I want you to know I will take your advice – It’s a Holocaust! – under serious consideration.” Would that be so hard? Really? “And like any other reasonable Commander-in-Chief, I welcome all of your opinions on bombing Iran.”

This Obama does not grant the legitimacy of his opponents’ concerns; he questions their bona fides in expressing them. “Many of the same people who argued for the war in Iraq are now making the case against the Iran nuclear deal,” he observed.

Look here, just because John Bolton said these things about Iraq:

“We are confident that Saddam Hussein has hidden weapons of mass destruction and production facilities in Iraq.” He added that, “the Iraqi people would be unique in history if they didn’t welcome the overthrow of this dictatorial regime,” and that … “the American role [in post-war Iraq] actually will be fairly minimal.”

…that shouldn’t preclude him from joining the adult conversation. It doesn’t mean his current opinions on Iran (NYT: “To Stop Iran’s Bomb, Bomb Iran”) shouldn’t be discussed as if they recently emanated from a burning bush, and then ultimately validated.

The inconvenient truth is that only military action like Israel’s 1981 attack on Saddam Hussein’s Osirak reactor in Iraq or its 2007 destruction of a Syrian reactor, designed and built by North Korea, can accomplish what is required.

Bolton happens to be a blood-stained Republican who has killed thousands of Americans in the past, why can’t the president respect that? Is it too much to ask he spend a little time listening to John thoughtfully? As well to all of his pact’s other critics, who only want what Israel does – that America never make any deal with Iran under any circumstances, no matter what?

I think after having heard them all out, every last one of the warpath right-wing, with all their identical opinions, the president could then make quite a robust argument against his own agreement.

The more the president makes that case, the less he insults his critics — yes, even the ones who insult him as a feckless, naive negotiator — the better.

…the more the president makes that case – yes, even to deaf ears, in deferential phrases and dulcet tones please – the better. Because ultimately the multi-national arglebargle, with all its foofy designs on avoiding war and reducing atomic weapons abroad, isn’t really all that important compared to fostering an air of middle-American civility and meaningless respect back here at home. Where I, Ruth Marcus, just happen to live. I’ll have you know I believe all of this generally and universally though I would never be interested in seeing it realized on the other side. Because everybody knows the Republicans are a seething swarm of Glock-toting Daddies who never listen to anybody – to me, a WaPo employee, least of all. It’s not like I’m stupid. Thank you all, this has been…“Barack Obama: Embittered and unfair over Iran.”

Share

Great moments in liberal media

On Tuesday, after the terms of the Iran accord were announced, CBS News’ Major Garrett asked President Obama:

“Can you tell the country, sir, why you are content — with all the fanfare around this deal — to leave the conscience of this nation and the strength of this nation unaccounted for in relation to these four Americans?”

…but friends, please don’t accuse Garrett of behaving un-professionally or asking un-answerable questions. He happens to be the rare reporter who keeps tabs on the conscience and the strength of this nation, and we’re very fortunate to have him.

Share
Next