Smithers? Yes sir? Release the poodles.

The fierce blogginati of the Conservative Intra-Uterine Candidates 2012 Dysfunction Filibuster shed their background roles yesterday in favor of something a little weightier. Something a little more dramatic. King Lear, probably? Staggering in a shitstorm of Rush Limbaugh’s making, they a-wailed:

You sulphurous and thought-executing fires,
Vaunt-couriers to oak-cleaving thunderbolts,
Singe my white head! And thou, all-shaking thunder,
I am warning you, I’ll GET YOU FOR THIS.

Yea, totes. Well, that’s what it looked like to me. What’s this to you?

EXCLUSIVE: DEMS INCITE DEATH THREATS AGAINST LIMBAUGH
Dan Riehl | Breitbart.com

AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAUUUUGGGGHHHHHHHH .. . .. . . !

See? Maddening regret, driven by fear. Tinged with rage.

Conservative talk radio host Rush Limbaugh is being targeted by multiple death threats after President Barack Obama and the Democratic Party ignored his apology for controversial remarks and continued to single him out for rebuke.

If only death threats, rather than people, could target people. I could say, “I’ll get you, Richard Simmons” and the little word-cloud would chase him around for eternity. You think he’s skinny now?

Admit that you’ve gone nuts, Dan. Then, we’ll — no, never mind, Dan could never be sane. He’s a cliche-chucking bunghole, and he likes it that way. Dan says that after we rejected Serene Ol’ Rush’s apology — tear-stained! sincere! — we a-holes came ’round for another crack at him wielding an even nastier tactic: Single him out. Ha! We now shall mention you by name, Fat Man, oops. I call thee: Rush Limbaugh. (*satan wakes* ‘What now? Who?’) Aauugh! You’re killing him!

The mainstream media is also culpable here, as NewsBusters has pointed out in an article titled “Onslaught: ABC Airs Eight Limbaugh Stories in Less Than Five Days.”

Note: ABC News airs stories of interest. Counter, Newsbusters: “In a blatant display of partisanship, the liberal media, led by ABC, have aired 11 stories on the crash of a New York-bound jetliner that killed 23 people. HEY– just because you hate jumbo jets does not give you the right to poison our children’s minds, moonbats.” Okay, I get it. STOP. TALKING. ABOUT. RUSH.

Yet, none have yet to point out the evil, uglier, if not dangerous, side of the very same campaign now being driven directly by Obama and his sycophants in progressive New Media, with the help of complicit mainstream outlets . . the left has pressed home what it sees as a sudden political opportunity provided by Rush’s provocative reaction–despite his apology.

Yes, you’re getting your asses kicked. But the kickers are just regular Americans. They can no longer fucking stand Rush fucking Limbaugh. I have pretty good evidence of that: All my old posts and videos on him have been ‘blowing up.’ It’s as if people were double-checking, “Is he really this shitty?” So every day, they see more. This will continue for a while — America seeing more, Rush looking worse.

But just go blame someone else. Hell, that’s your job.

The Party of Hate
John Hinderaker | Powerline

Somebody else must have done something to get Americans so angry. Somebody else must have driven people to the internet by perhaps the millions so they could find out who this Rush Limbaugh really is. Who did it?

Millions of Americans voted for Barack Obama in the hope that he would be a trailblazer who would conduct the presidency in a new way. Well, he has: Obama has been the most divisive president in our modern history, unabashedly stirring up hate against not only his political enemies, but against private citizens who exercise their right to participate in our democracy. The most recent hatefest has been directed against Rush Limbaugh, and Obama has personally stirred the pot.

Got it, John. Just let me ask you: What exactly has Obama “personally” done? Why, John answers, I can barely count all the things the President has done to hurt America. John says that Obama “personally” tore America apart when Bill Maher called Sarah Palin a “cunt.” And also when Bill Maher called Palin a “dumb twat.” And when Bill Maher “contributed $1 million to re-elect Obama.”

John also says Obama “personally” engineered the destruction of civility when Rep. Sheila Jackson Lee refused to condemn Bill Maher for calling Sarah Palin a “cunt” and a “dumb twat.” John also reminds you Obama “personally” decimated the present and future of this great nation when Rep. Jan Schakowsky refused to call for the return of Bill Maher’s donation.

Gaze from top to bottom. The evidence! Take that.

Barack Obama has been a terrible president in many ways, but perhaps his most poisonous legacy is his cynical fomenting of partisan hate to advance his own political interests.

Please, John, stop. Just stop typing before I start to cry.

After three years, we have learned that “hope” is not the word that we should associate with the Obama presidency . .

Oh, lordy. It’s all true…

Well, aren’t we hilarious? Bush-era jurists are a jolly bunch.

The chief judge for one of 94 U.S. districts, the District of Montana, has apologized for a joke he circulated.

HELENA — Chief U.S. District Judge Richard Cebull on Wednesday admitted to sending a racially charged email about President Barack Obama from his courthouse chambers.

Here it is. Try not to fall out of your chair…

The forwarded text reads as follow:

“Normally I don’t send or forward a lot of these, but even by my standards, it was a bit touching. I want all of my friends to feel what I felt when I read this. Hope it touches your heart like it did mine.”

“A little boy said to his mother; ‘Mommy, how come I’m black and you’re white?’” the email joke reads. “His mother replied, ‘Don’t even go there Barack! From what I can remember about that party, you’re lucky you don’t bark!’”

Get it? The President’s deceased mother had dog-sex! Hoo. I wonder if Cebull will appreciate all the good-natured chuckles coming his way now that we know who he is, what he’s like, and how well-suited he is to the chief district judgeship. Not that this isn’t predictable behavior for W.’s minions, the paragons of high class and ‘horse’ sense.

If you were to trundle yourself over to Powerline blog (why? I don’t know), you could read all sorts of things. They write about the election, they write about politics, they write about the media, they write about culture.

In one post, Scott re-visits my hometown and remembers when he first saw it:

So far as I could tell, Bob and I were the only two people in Venice who were working for a living.

Indeed. Well observed. Over the last 30 years, neighboring Santa Monica has stayed essentially the same, and it’s completely different:

This time around, however, I found that bums were liberally populating the public property fronting the beautiful beach . . There were bums galore, enough of them that I thought if only they could get their stuff together, they would make up an impressive Occupy Santa Monica encampment. It might even get them off the beachfront — a win-win for all involved.

This is good blogging. Canny and finely nuanced. This too: John’s commentary on the Italian cruise ship Costa Concordia running aground:

The trappings of high-technology civilization make us feel secure, but much of the time we are just a moment away from primal disaster.

Disasters simply haven’t evolved as quickly as we’d like. Here’s what ‘primal’ actually means. Back to the writing:

Ships have been running aground on rocks and reefs for centuries, but what was a predictable hazard five hundred years ago seems shocking in the 21st century, especially when it happens in the thoroughly mapped and domesticated Mediterranean. The image of the Costa Concordia lying on its side is a classic image of the fallibility of modern civilization . .

When a ship’s captain makes exactly the same mistake captains have made for thousands of years, it’s an example of the “fallibility of modern civilization.” I guess if the captain’s daughter had plugged in her iPad too near the sonar unit and the readings had jumped from meters to feet, that would have been Melvillean. If the ship had run aground on Skylab, there’d be nothing for Joseph Conrad to do but whistle and nod. Let’s forget how dangerous it’ll remain to crash things on Ursa X-1, and let’s medulla bleearb on the “fallibility of colony spacelife.” And, Segway:

This Newsweek slur caught John’s eye.

Seeing how it’s his blog, Hinderaker could have said anything. He could have put up a heckuva fight. But no.

Well, sure. We who who [sic] are unhappy that unemployment has increased on Obama’s watch, that over-regulation has stymied economic growth, that our children now owe a $15 trillion debt that we can’t pay–hey, we’re just dumb! We obviously aren’t smart enough to understand how devastating our economy, unemploying millions of Americans and burdening our children with trillions of dollars in debt is really a great idea.

This is John being smart. Take that, Newsweek. It’s almost a cheap trick on the magazine’s part, picking on fools who will surely respond in assrocket manner. And then jerks like me will point out that this post does not, in fact, deflect charges of stupidity. People will see that John has portioned himself some rope and fashioned a pointed hemp cap. And that, too, will have a noose that works its way around his neck.

BLS unemployment statistics:

From which, a chart:

That red dot? That’s when Obama took over, in the midst of an economic collapse. So John is dead boing right: “unemployment has increased on Obama’s watch.” It’s gone from 7.8% to 8.5%. Would it be intelligent to bring up anything else? Anything at all? Naw.

And, also: Obama’s administration is guilty of under-regulation, if anything, growth is slow because of weak demand, the majority of national debt is due to Reagan and W. Bush, neither of which had to deal with a Great Recession, and “unemploying” is not a word. In, also, additionally: if you’re brilliant enough to somehow blame Obama for unjobbenating 0.7% of the work force, you certainly could figure out that’s a million people. Not “millions.”

Why don’t I get paid to do this? Because so many of these posts write themselves.

Britain’s Daily Mail noticed a restaurant in China playing off the President’s name and likeness to sell chicken:

Is Obama abandoning his bid for a second term in the White House and is giving Colonel Sanders a run for his money by opening a chain of fried chicken joints? Now that’s change you can’t really believe in.

But in Beijing, China, a restaurant is actually calling itself OFC with a logo that looks alarmingly like the President dressed in the colonel’s clothes.

Pic:

There you go. Gee, do you think the Freepers would be interested in a ‘story’ like that?

Do watermelons have seeds?

. . They already have the Michelle dinner special. 2 small breasts, 2 Fat thighs and a couple of left wings.

6 posted on Sunday, October 02, 2011 8:40:06 AM by sinanju

My order? Nega…nega chicken…nega, nega mashed potatoes…nega corn…

13 posted on Sunday, October 02, 2011 8:55:57 AM by Rokurota

Order the Moo-Shell meal….comes with two incredibly large thighs, two over sized buns and some peas. Shut up and eat ‘em.

9 posted on Sunday, October 02, 2011 3:16:35 PM by IrishPennant

If they also sold pints of Ripple in a brown bag and six-packs of Colt 45, the competition couldn’t touch them.

22 posted on Sunday, October 02, 2011 9:28:07 AM by jmax

10 posted on Sunday, October 02, 2011 4:30:19 PM by mikrofon

Obama Fried Chicken:

There’s a note with the chicken telling the person rich people are making them fat because they have to eat the chicken.

The chicken cost 4 trillion to raise but they’re only selling it for about ‘tree fity’. On the box cover you’re thanked for being part of Obama’s recovery by buying the chicken.

4 posted on Sunday, October 02, 2011 8:18:42 PM by Secret Agent Man

9 posted on Sunday, October 02, 2011 8:42:00 PM by VeniVidiVici

They called you ‘Communist,’ ‘Socialist,’ ‘Nazi,’ ‘dangerous’ and ‘un-American.’ They filibustered every piece of legislation they could. They called out ‘You lie!’ in the middle of your address on healthcare reform. Their loyal fans passed around photoshopped images of you with a bone in your house, of the White House as a watermelon patch, of your wife as a gorilla.

Most importantly, they destroyed the economy, and that made the nation miserable, nearly destroying any chance of your getting re-elected. Seeing what they wrought, what did they do? They demanded the Fed maximize the pain. They hurt Americans in order to hurt you.

Have you had enough, Mr. President?

“I mean has anybody been watching the debates lately?” Obama said. “You’ve got a governor whose state is on fire denying climate change.

“It’s true. You’ve got audiences cheering at the prospect of somebody dying because they don’t have healthcare. And booing a service member in Iraq because they’re gay.”

Looks like it. Thank you, sir.

Obama continued his critique of Republicans, saying of the boos in the audience at recent GOP debates: “That’s not reflective of who we are.”

“This is a choice about the fundamental direction of our country,” the president said. “2008 was an important direction. 2012 is a more important election.”

And all of this is the goddamned truth. Just the facts.

Obama will be in L.A. today, and he’s likely to gridlock several parts of the city. For this guy? I don’t mind.

Obama SEAL doll marks bin Laden killing
. . action figure features muscular president with assault rifle . .
By LeAnne Gendreau | msnbc.com

Navy SEALs have become national heroes since news broke that they took down Osama bin Laden, so it’s fitting that the newest action figure from a Connecticut company is a fierce-looking President Barack Obama as a SEAL.

The minute Obama said late on the night of May 1 that the U.S. had found and killed bin Laden, Emil Vicale knew which his action figure company’s would make next — Rambama.

Here he comes, straight off the Hero Builders factory floor:

Hmm, he’s certainly good looking and plenty buff. And though he spends most his time spilling terrorists’ brains, he’s still in a good mood. I can’t but like the guy.

But, oh, this will be a problem. Conservatives take the reality of fantasy more seriously than they take reality, so this blob of plastic will mount a threat (and pppllllleeeennnnty of aaaassssss in their dreams).

“But the dang thing is for children,” you say? The wingnuts are nothing but children: spiteful little ‘traditionalists’ spoiling in a pre-adult state. So, traitors, just stack the new Black G.I. Joe-Bamas right next to Miley Cyrus’ Joys of Fisting at the Toys ‘R’ Us.

Btw, I promise you: I haven’t begun to bounce around the right-wing blogosphere. I write this lead-in knowing full well they’ll be anxious to take the president down a thousand notches before this plastic Baal obliterates whatever future they might have had.

. . aaaaannnd, yep. JOSHUAPUNDIT:

I’m sure most of the on-air lineup at MSNBC have already placed rush orders.

Never mind – it’s curiously appropriate somehow that what we have here is a phony stuffed plastic dummy playing dress up with a toy gun and a ‘Punisher’ tee.

A real stuffed plastic dummy would be fine, or a legitimately hollow plastic dummy, or a phony stuffed plastic genius. But this thing — it’s too much! And you outfitted it with a toy gun? You, sir, act like my children were prone to stupidity, or violent death. Sister Toldjah:

Nothing about this doll fits the man who inspired it (make sure to take a look at the picture at the link above). For one thing, as we all know President Obama doesn’t have a particular fondness for guns, firearms – or, well, anything you’d use for self-defense outside of pepper spray. True, he did give the authorization to take out OBL – which some in the administration have tried to ridiculously paint as ‘just as courageous’ as the SEAL team that actually did the deed, but the ‘risks’ he took by making that decision did not involve putting his life on the line. So, please, let’s keep things in perspective. Secondly, this doll makes him look like a fierce, devoted war hero of sorts when in reality he’s staunchly anti-war. Thirdly, it shows Obama bulked up – in fatigues. The only thing bulked up about our celebrity President is his massive ego.

Bravo! Get out your bullhorn of truth, Sister, and jam it in the kids’ faces: “HE’S NOT LIKE THAT. NO ONE LIKES HIM. I SAY IT’S TIME YOU GREW UP. HUH? SAYS WHAT? OH THAT’S VERY MATURE, KYLE.”

Golly-gosh tabbers, helablog:

From the minds of Herobuilders, comes a highly controversial and unpopular Obama Seal Team 6 action figure, aptly named Rambama.

How unpopular you ask? Well it looks like they may be having problems keeping their site online and by the looks of ‘loving’ comments left of the site, things may get ugly.

–”What an insult to true American people and the Navy Seals. I know you’re doing this as a desperate move to conjure business, however, what a disgrace you idiots are!”

–”The Seals deserve better than that…I grew up in inner city Chicago…you don’t rise through the political ranks by being a choir boy; in other words, you morons, all politicians are extremely corrupt.”

–”You ought to be ashamed of yourself for creating the Navy SEAL action figure depicting the President (which never served in any branch of the US Military) as a Navy SEAL and for trying to profit from it!”

Surprising. Nowadays, kids only stay at home and traffic among right-wing blogs. Occasionally, there’s something to be angry about: I hate your toy.
I won’t play with it. It haunts me in my dreams.

NOTE: . . the somber JOSHUAPUNDIT blog, “A DIGEST AND COMMENTARY ON THE WAR AGAINST JIHAD,” pulled their Rambama dolly post.

Birtherism is dead. Long live Pammy Geller.

The Queen of Islamophobia isn’t satisfied with being the sort of hideous bigot to make a Klansman’s skin crawl. No, the end of ugly appears neither here nor in sight whenever Pam’s around.

So she’s been furiously, demonstrably disgusted with all one or two billion people of Muslim faith, so what? There are still a couple of defenseless people she can squash with her blog hammer. The president’s dead parents could use a decent obliterating:

An illegitimate child, an illegitimate president
World Net Daily | May 05, 2011 | By Pamela Geller

. . Stanley Ann Dunham was a white girl in a family way with a mixed-race child, desperate for legitimacy in a culture that condemned such behavior as abject immorality, and Barack Obama Sr. was a con man from Kenya desperate to stay in the USA.

Negro con man? Meet White trash. How do you do? Tee hee, I like you, jungle boy, let’s get it on.

Further, when BHO I returned to Kenya, he apparently lived with his first Kenyan wife and his American third wife, suggesting that the “divorce” he ostensibly secured to marry Dunham was a transitory ruse.

That would make the president illegitimate. In 1787, illegitimate children had different rights. There is no way the founders of this great nation intended for an illegitimate child of a foreign bigamist to attain the highest, most powerful position in the new land.

Nice, neat equivocation. Bastard baby = bastard presidency. I’d love to see Pam argue that before the Supreme Court.

PAM: “Your Honors, let me open by saying . . he’s a Black bastard!”

JUSTICE ANTONIN SCALIA: “DAAY-ANG! Talk to the . . No she . . “

JUSTICE FINISH SMACK: “HAND! DIH-HINT!”

JUSTICE MORTAL KOMBAT: “PAM . . WINS.”

JUSTICE BEA OOH-YEAH: “BOOYEAH!”

(I never said she was smart.)

One doesn’t hand over the reins of power to just anyone, particularly those with an unknown or sketchy past. The dearth of documentation and paperwork led to more speculation.
The American people were like Helen Keller, and the Obama machine kept moving the furniture. Who is this man, and what is he hiding?

The President, and the furniture. See above.

Where are Obama’s Occidental College records; his Columbia College records; his Columbia thesis paper; his Harvard records; his Selective Service registration; his medical records . . 


I have a question, too. How does dogshit type?

Well, knock me over with a truncheon. National Review’s Jim Geraghty isn’t too hot on last night’s speech by President Obama, the one where he talked about intervening in Libya to prevent a civilian slaughter:

Cities and towns were shelled, mosques were destroyed, and apartment buildings reduced to rubble. Military jets and helicopter gunships were unleashed upon people who had no means to defend themselves against assaults from the air…

At this point, the United States and the world faced a choice. Qaddafi declared he would show “no mercy” to his own people. He compared them to rats, and threatened to go door to door to inflict punishment. In the past, we have seen him hang civilians in the streets, and kill over a thousand people in a single day. Now we saw regime forces on the outskirts of the city. We knew that if we wanted — if we waited one more day, Benghazi, a city nearly the size of Charlotte, could suffer a massacre that would have reverberated across the region and stained the conscience of the world.

To be fair, I’m torn over the decision to take military action. It’s nice to want to be the equitable policemen of the world, but the consequences are often dire: slaughter, political chaos, enmeshment in far-away lands with strange ways and lingering lusts for vengeance. As tragic as it may be, no one can save the entire world.

On the other hand, it’s an international effort with (supposed) limitations to our involvement, much of which will emphasize our high-tech capabilities and minimize our risks.

It is tempting. The Libyans appear to be peace and freedom seeking people, not unlike ourselves. They could use some help. So many issues of life and death, so many facets to the nasty use of violence.

But forget that ‘big question’ philosophy-of-aggression stuff. Jim Geraghty just doesn’t feel right:

. . but I feel tonight a lot like the night of Obama’s speech announcing the Afghanistan surge to West Point. On paper, I agree with a lot of what Obama is saying. But he’s stringing together a lot of pretty-sounding phrases without really getting at the questions most skeptical Americans have . .

Really? I thought he answered that stuff pretty decisively. Like what?

. . why intervene here and not in other places?

The imminent slaughter, the quote above. I think people got that.

Obama’s caught himself between his comments that clearly suggested regime change (Qaddafi must step down) and a strict adherence to a U.N. mandate that doesn’t include regime change. What is our goal?

The larger goal is regime change, but that’s not the military goal. I thought the President did a fairly good job splitting the difference, here:

The task that I assigned our forces -– to protect the Libyan people from immediate danger, and to establish a no-fly zone -– carries with it a U.N. mandate and international support. It’s also what the Libyan opposition asked us to do. If we tried to overthrow Qaddafi by force, our coalition would splinter. We would likely have to put U.S. troops on the ground to accomplish that mission, or risk killing many civilians from the air. The dangers faced by our men and women in uniform would be far greater. So would the costs and our share of the responsibility for what comes next.

To be blunt, we went down that road in Iraq.

So, Jim, it’s possible to have a foreign policy goal in which the military isn’t America’s one and only weapon. Right?

(If you’re trying to knock a brutal terror-sponsoring dictator out of power, knock him out of power! Don’t do it halfway!)

Right. Yeah, I know it’s confusing for a fan of George W. Bush.

In the end, Obama’s speech amounted to, “Look, I realize none of you understand my decision making, but at the end of the day, you can rest easy knowing I’m right.”

Oh my GOODNESS, please! Because a better president, in these tricky little gray areas of foreign policy, where lives hang in the balance, he comes on the TV and shrugs his shoulders? He says “Aw, heck, I’m not really sure what to do, it’s a whacky mess.” A guy sitting on your TV, scratching his head over Libya, now that would inspire confidence in Conservatives. Yes, you plainly adore everything reeking of half-assery, like your arguments.

Oh, those lingering memories of the muller-in-chief, the percolator, the brooder, George W. Bush. Wasn’t he one for thinking and strategizing and analyzing? And then making a complicated, labyrinthine case for one of his humble, but thorough, decisions?

No.

What is wrong with the Conservative brain? Why is it so difficult for them to grasp reality? Why are stodgy people so easily unhinged? How is it they lose their minds so routinely? Isn’t it traumatic to be so whacked out?

No one really knows. Or they won’t admit to anything. But we do know they’ve got real problems. And those problems always eventually come our way, don’t they?

Space Cadet Obama’s ‘Sputnik’ Gaffe Says It All
by James Delingpole | 01/28/2011 | Human Events

Earth calling Barack. Earth calling Barack: Do you have any idea which country ultimately won the space race—and why?

This question goes to the heart of what was so wrong with the President’s State of the Union address.

Jimmy? That was the point of the ‘Win the Future’ address. Being faced with the Soviet success of Sputnik, we had to double our efforts if we were to put a man on the moon before they did:

“Half a century ago, when the Soviets beat us into space with the launch of a satellite called Sputnik, we had no idea how we’d beat them to the moon,” he told congress. “The science wasn’t there yet. Nasa didn’t even exist.”

“But after investing in better research and education, we didn’t just surpass the Soviets – we unleashed a wave of innovation that created new industries and millions of new jobs.”

Instead of celebrating the freedom, prosperity, ingenuity, and natural abundance that enabled America to put the first man on the moon, Obama missed the point completely. He talked not of an “Apollo moment” or a “Mercury moment,” but of “our generation’s Sputnik moment.” That’s Sputnik, as in the bad guys.

Jimmy! JIMMY:

“This is our generation’s Sputnik moment. At stake is whether new jobs and industries take root in this country or somewhere else.”

“It’s whether the hard work and industry of our people is rewarded. It’s whether we sustain the leadership that has made America not just a place on a map, but a light to the world.”

The ‘bad guys’ raised the stakes, but we took on the challenge and won. Because of that response, that re-commitment borne of our essential nature, we remain “a light to the world.” That’s the president’s message, Jimmy. Shouldn’t you have at least watched the speech? Shouldn’t you know something – anything — about what you’re criticizing?

. . we should ever be suspicious when a liberal starts singing the praises of the space race. Traditionally, space has been a conservative sphere, a place for God-fearing young men with buzz cuts and exemplary war records, oozing testosterone, dangerous patriotism, and an unhealthy love of weaponry, the most ostentatious embodiment of the vast “military-industrial complex” that young liberals are taught from an early age to fear and loathe.

Apparently not. Apparently, you can just make up all sorts of insane shit and get published on giant, well-trafficked Conservative websites. There, you will be treated as if you wrote the SPUTNIK entry in the Encyclopedia Britannica. Why not? Though you know absolutely squat about it? That sort of loose affiliation with reality makes for pointed lunatic criticism of sensible opponents. And now we’re getting to the matter, I think.

However, there are few things that get liberals more excited than an excuse to mobilize the entire nation in the service of a great cause. That’s “mobilize” as in “allow Big Government to take over everything . . “

Like a Space Race. Why bother, Jimmy? Does it hurt?

You have to get up . . PRETTY EARLY IN THE MORNING . . to have any clue what Paul Broun is talking about:

. . it is a trap that, uh, and a ruse that the Democrats are proposing. Back to what Dan was saying a minute ago — they don’t want civility, they want silence from the Republicans. And the sitting together being, uh, kissy-kissy is just another way to try to silence Republicans, and also to show that, uh, to keep the American people from seeing how few of them that there are in the U.S. House now. Then when people stand up to what the Democrats are going to be doing when the, Barack Obama spews out all his venom, then, um, if they’re scattered throughout the Republicans, then it won’t be as noticeable as if we’re sitting apart. So it is a ruse and I’m not in favor of it and I’m talking about it and I hope other members of the Republican conference in the House will not take the bait. You’re exactly right.

Dodging Obama’s every puke and strike, Broun will expose the lonely Democrats. That should change the political fortunes of everyone, forever.

Here, let’s let Byron set the slippery scene:

Pundits and politicians alike praised President Obama’s speech at the Tucson memorial service last Wednesday. “A wonderful speech,” wrote the New York Times’ David Brooks. “A magnificent performance,” wrote National Review’s Rich Lowry. “A terrific speech,” wrote Sen. John McCain.

And those were just the voices on the right.

Oh no! ‘Mr. Hitler is a strong and energetic leader whose resurgent nation appreciates his firm hand’ — AND THOSE WERE JUST THE BRITISH! I’m inventing all this, so I’m no better than York. But I think you get my drift: ‘Black Flag is my favorite soft rock band‘ — THOSE WERE JUST THE APHIDS!

Byron obviously has taken it upon himself to prevent this cynical President from cackling while he spikes the tragedy football in America’s end zone. Someone with a modicum of genius and a teh-TINY-yum backbone might envision Obama doing backflips through victims memorials, or taking the podium to freestyle about that faggot, Boehner:

Rethinking Obama’s political performance in Tucson
Byron York | Washington Examiner | 1/15/11

. . By the time Obama spoke, there was irrefutable evidence that shooting suspect Jared Loughner was deeply mentally ill and acted out of no recognizable political agenda. Obama simply could not have made the case that Loughner’s acts were in any way the product of political rhetoric from right or left.

. . So even as he conceded that rhetoric did not cause the violence, Obama argued that it should be muted anyway. And he cloaked his appeal in so much emotionalism, in so many tear-jerking references to the recently departed, that some in his audience might not have noticed he was making the political point he wanted to make all along.

Sonuvabitch! BASTARD! Backed into a corner, Barack gave the only speech he could have ever given! There were no other speeches to give! But he used it to wangle political points! Wangle is a word!

In Tucson, Obama played good cop to their bad cop by assuring everyone that rhetoric had not motivated the violence. But he still brought up the topic because, he said, it had “been discussed in recent days.” Of course, it would not have been discussed in recent days had his supporters not made so many unfair accusations.

They fell right in his trap!

Some Democratic strategists hope Obama can capitalize on Tucson the way Bill Clinton capitalized on Oklahoma City. Perhaps he’ll be able to, and perhaps he won’t. But he’s already trying.

By pretending not to! The nuclear option!

What the hell were they thinking?

The nation is shocked. People are grieving. So the President decides to address the people of the particular community that have suffered most egregiously. What a good thing.

But the administration rolls out rally shirts for those who came to pay their respects? What The Fuck?

“Together We Thrive”? I’ve got a sinking feeling I’m going to see that slogan in the future. When and if I do, a whole pile of cynical assholes should get fired. What a great way to piss on a serious event.

Terrific speech, by the way, but a bizarre crowd. Maybe they’d have been more respectful if they hadn’t gotten goosed.