Showing posts with label republican. Show all posts
Showing posts with label republican. Show all posts
Thursday, June 16, 2011
Thursday, January 27, 2011
Saturday, October 30, 2010
Tuesday, October 26, 2010
Friday, September 10, 2010
Worst Political Speech Ever
This "speech" remains just as awful at the end as it begins. What makes my head spin is he claims to have a master's degree in communication!
Friday, March 5, 2010
Does This "Family Values" Republican Look Gay To You?
Ah, Hypocrisy. Where Would the GOP be Without You? cont'd
It just doesn't get much better than this. Gay bashing, homo hating California State Senator (R, of course) Roy Ashburn was arrested yesterday morning for drunk driving. He had an unidentified male passenger in the car. His blood alcohol level was 0.14 (0.08 is the legal limit). Where had he been all night? Turns out he had been partying hard in a gay bar.
[...] West Sacto's openly gay mayor, Christopher Cabaldon, called him a hypocrite, claiming he has spotted Ashburn at gay clubs, including Badlands. Cabaldon blasted Ashburn in a message he posted to Facebook a few months ago: "It wouldn't bother me so bad to see Roy Ashburn at Badlands with a boy if he didn't have such a bad voting record on gay rights."
As Cabaldon suggests, Ashburn['s] voting record on gay issues is less than stellar. The Bakersfield Californian reports he voted no an anti-discrimination bill, legislation on out-of-state same sex marriages, Harvey Milk Day, and a resolution declaring the Senate's opposition to Proposition 8. The Bakersfield Californian has more about his voting record. more
Labels:
ashburn,
gay,
gop,
homosexual,
hypocrisy,
piece of shit,
republican
Monday, November 2, 2009
Another Reason to Hate the South
After living in Savannah, Georgia for a year, the stupidity of Southerners is no surprise to me. I'm perhaps more surprised at the Midwest numbers which I would have expected to be closer to even (I'm not sure if they're counting Kentucky in the Midwest or South). Can the GOP widen their appeal to more than just the ignorant bigots that support them now? Do they even realize their support is now limited to inbred southern whites? Or have they gone so far down the path of whoring to the ultra-right wing zealots of the country that they have begun believing their own rhetoric? This is, after all, the party that called a fraction of a percent, hotly contested victory "a mandate." More than a few times I heard Republicans refer to Bush's "election" as a vote by "the vast majority of Americans." The last I heard, 50.2% is not a "vast majority" of anything. Personally I'm just fine with the GOP continuing to become further right, more white, and more stupid. Now if the Democrats would just grow some balls and get to work.
[I posted this a few weeks ago on Facebook before I realized it's a worthless forum for political musings. I prefer to type to myself.]
Labels:
deep south,
gop,
republican,
south,
support,
suvey
Saturday, October 17, 2009
Republicans Support Rape
If, to protect Haliburton, you have to side against rape victims, you might want to rethink your allegiances. - John Stewart
| The Daily Show With Jon Stewart | Mon - Thurs 11p / 10c | |||
| www.thedailyshow.com | ||||
| ||||
Labels:
corporate,
haliburton,
jeff sessions,
rape,
republican
Wednesday, September 9, 2009
Is It Just Me Or Are They Mostly Republicans?
There used to be video here but the "embed" feature was disabled by CBS for reasons I don't understand. Here's a link to the video: http://www.cbs2.com/video/?id=113582@kcbs.dayport.com
Yet another "family values" Republican is caught fucking around.
Yet another "family values" Republican is caught fucking around.
September 9, 2009DUVALL RESIGNS OVER SEX BLAB FLAP Michael Duvall has resigned from the California State Assembly after a local TV news station reported his remarks about sexual escapades with two lobbyists. Duvall was unaware that a live mic was picking up his hanky-spanky talk.
Labels:
california,
duvall,
family values,
lobbyists,
republican
Saturday, August 22, 2009
The McVeighists
I ran into this term being presented as a descriptive of the far-right gun loons: McVeighists. I'll just snag the word's usage from the thread:*
Labels:
hate,
language,
law,
loons,
mcveigh,
mcveighist,
mcveighists,
republican,
right-wing,
second ammendment,
terror,
terrorism,
terrorist,
terrorists,
timothy mcveigh,
word
Tuesday, August 18, 2009
Heil Hitler, She Said
A white "teabagger" woman yells, "Heil Hitler" at a Jewish man at a town hall. I wonder what it's like to be an adult but think and act like a thirteen year old.
Labels:
heil,
hitler,
jew,
republican,
teabaggers,
town hall
Thursday, June 18, 2009
Tuesday, May 5, 2009
Thursday, March 12, 2009
Saturday, March 7, 2009
Change.org
A little while ago an anonymous reader suggested I post to Change.org because it was somehow an instrumental place to post for loud-mouthed progressives. (see the comments under this topic)
I gave it a shot and found it is the place for limp wristed hippy wannabes to whine politely.
On my first post at Change.org (for which I received multiple compliments) I was reprimanded for using the word "rape" to describe what the banks and the recent right wing administration has done and continues to do to poor people. I already cross-posted this here.
Then came this e-mail:
Now here's the first bit that makes me angry (other than being given a stupid order by a stranger): She did not post this on the forum but sent it to me personally, but via a blind e-mail that made her reply appear as if it were a post. I responded to her the only way available to me (the reply address for the e-mail is "mail@change.org" so I could not reply directly via e-mail) by posting her comment and a rebuttal which unfortunately I did not save a copy of. My response was that I was offended by her censorship and argued that there was class warfare being conducted and just like war in Darfur, this type of rape was being perpetrated against the poor by the rich. I explained in detail how rape was the perfect analogy for what's going on both because it is horrible but also because it can be repeated unlike most other acts of war that involve killing people. I did not use any commonly acknowledged profanity (unlike here in this blog) and the argument was well crafted.
I even argued that she should feel free to delete any of my language they find disagreeable as long as they put "[censored]" in its place.
Rather than reply in the forum Leigh Graham deleted the rebuttal and sent me this e-mail:
"My site, my rules." [self censored obscenity]. That's not Democratic, it's not politic, and it makes your forum worthless. If you can't argue then don't host a public forum. If opinions cannot be expressed in commonly acceptable language (i.e. if you can say it on the radio and not get fined) then expression is restricted and violated.
This is why I won't post on stupid, bullshit, politically correct sites like this. This is why the Democratic party will lose again to the Republicans. The Republicans make up a problem and then talk about it with fiery, populist rhetoric. The Democrats are so afraid they might offend someone even though they are totally right, all their language is watered down, milky, and devoid of passion or righteousness. Rather than call a spade a spade they feel they have to call it "that triple lobed playing card emblem." It's bogus, it's weak, and it's typical. Better not use the word "puppy" as a noun because someone might be allergic to dogs!
I don't want anything to do with a bunch of pussies like that. I will not be party to censorship of any kind, especially when it is of this overly aggressive politically correct variety. All change.org has managed to do for me is make me angry. Fucking worthless.
I gave it a shot and found it is the place for limp wristed hippy wannabes to whine politely.
On my first post at Change.org (for which I received multiple compliments) I was reprimanded for using the word "rape" to describe what the banks and the recent right wing administration has done and continues to do to poor people. I already cross-posted this here.
Then came this e-mail:
Alan,"Alan, please refrain from using the word "raping" as a verb here."?!? So I could say "the rape of the poor by the rich continues" but not "the rich are raping the poor"?
There has been a new response posted to the following discussion on Change.org:
Conflicting Interests in Obama's Housing Plan
----------------------------------------------
Alan, please refrain from using the word "raping" as a verb here. It's extremely violent and unnecessary hyperbole that is upsetting in its imagery.
posted by Leigh Graham
----------------------------------------------
Click the link below to view this discussion.
http://uspoverty.change.org/blog/view/conflicting_interests_in_obamas_housing_plan
Now here's the first bit that makes me angry (other than being given a stupid order by a stranger): She did not post this on the forum but sent it to me personally, but via a blind e-mail that made her reply appear as if it were a post. I responded to her the only way available to me (the reply address for the e-mail is "mail@change.org" so I could not reply directly via e-mail) by posting her comment and a rebuttal which unfortunately I did not save a copy of. My response was that I was offended by her censorship and argued that there was class warfare being conducted and just like war in Darfur, this type of rape was being perpetrated against the poor by the rich. I explained in detail how rape was the perfect analogy for what's going on both because it is horrible but also because it can be repeated unlike most other acts of war that involve killing people. I did not use any commonly acknowledged profanity (unlike here in this blog) and the argument was well crafted.
I even argued that she should feel free to delete any of my language they find disagreeable as long as they put "[censored]" in its place.
Rather than reply in the forum Leigh Graham deleted the rebuttal and sent me this e-mail:
Alan Miller,I replied to the e-mail notification despite the fact I'm sure it vanished into nothingness at change.org, but here it is anyway:
Your comment on the blog entry entitled 'Conflicting Interests in Obama's Housing Plan' has been removed from the Poverty in America community on Change.org by an administrator.
---------------------------------------------------------------
REASON: Alan, As I thought, your word choice has upset other readers. I was sent an abuse report and asked to consider deleting your comment. I am going to do so. My site, my rules, and I find your English degree pales in comparison to a rape survivor's emotional health as justification for using the word versus not.
---------------------------------------------------------------
If you have any questions please read the Terms of Service or contact us at help@change.org.
- Change.org
Censorship is censorship.Welcome to post freedom America
"My site, my rules." [self censored obscenity]. That's not Democratic, it's not politic, and it makes your forum worthless. If you can't argue then don't host a public forum. If opinions cannot be expressed in commonly acceptable language (i.e. if you can say it on the radio and not get fined) then expression is restricted and violated.
This is why I won't post on stupid, bullshit, politically correct sites like this. This is why the Democratic party will lose again to the Republicans. The Republicans make up a problem and then talk about it with fiery, populist rhetoric. The Democrats are so afraid they might offend someone even though they are totally right, all their language is watered down, milky, and devoid of passion or righteousness. Rather than call a spade a spade they feel they have to call it "that triple lobed playing card emblem." It's bogus, it's weak, and it's typical. Better not use the word "puppy" as a noun because someone might be allergic to dogs!
I don't want anything to do with a bunch of pussies like that. I will not be party to censorship of any kind, especially when it is of this overly aggressive politically correct variety. All change.org has managed to do for me is make me angry. Fucking worthless.
Labels:
censorship,
change,
change.org,
democratic,
language,
political correctness,
republican,
rhetoric
Tuesday, November 25, 2008
Friday, October 31, 2008
Twit of the Year Show
via Harper's
I have this image in my head of what it's like to be inside the Republican campaign. It's like the great "Twit of the Year" skit by Monty Python's Flying Circus. Except that these twits are kind of mean and angry and they're throwing poop at the people watching them. And occasionally clubbing one of their own to death in retribution. Did you notice how Goldfarb went to "pals around with" instinctively? "Palling around with terrorists" was a big hit for Sarah Palin but this guy is just grasping for straws. The "Straight Talk Express" has become the "Say Anything That Pops Into Your Mind Express." They act like fucking third graders. They do something wrong that you see yourself and they stand there and say straight to your face, "I didn't do anything." They'll make a mistake or get carried away and they can't quite bring themselves to just admitting it and continuing on. "Say Whatever Express" fits better on the bus marquee. All the same, they're a particularly nasty bunch of twits.
Thursday, October 30, 2008
Socialism
I hear Barack Obama is actually Mao Tse Tung reincarnated.
And also (to quote Sarah Palin*) that he thinks we should share our toys.
He's obviously un-American and an elitist that will hand us over to Osama (see? even his name sounds like that!) and wave the white flag of surrender everywhere.
This presidential campaign has gotten so tedious I think my head will explode. The Republicans' tone has gotten so shrill they're starting to sound like an un-oiled engine about to seize up.

*She says, "And also" a lot.
And also (to quote Sarah Palin*) that he thinks we should share our toys.
He's obviously un-American and an elitist that will hand us over to Osama (see? even his name sounds like that!) and wave the white flag of surrender everywhere.
This presidential campaign has gotten so tedious I think my head will explode. The Republicans' tone has gotten so shrill they're starting to sound like an un-oiled engine about to seize up.
*She says, "And also" a lot.
Labels:
bors,
obama,
Palin,
president,
republican
Wednesday, September 10, 2008
Lipstick on a Pig
I hereby declare this to be one of the stupidest diversions the Nazis (a.k.a. Republicans) have come up with yet. Listen to this NPR piece and tell me you believe Obama was referring to Sarah Palin. They play the lines preceding the pig and lipstick lines and it is obvious he is talking about McCain's policies. Palin is not mentioned at all. You will hear several other politicians, including John McCain using this old saw in their speeches exactly as Obama used it.
The phrase "lipstick on a pig" is commonly employed by politicians including Senator John McCain, Vice President Dick Cheney and Rep. Charles Rangel. Farmer Joel Salatin of Swoope, Va., talks about what actually happens when one attempts to put lipstick on a pig.Do you smell Karl Rove? Makes me wish for the smell of pig shit.
More On That "Bridge to Nowhere"
Palin lobbied hard for the bridge in Gravina, Alaska, and she kept all the Federal money for it. How does that equal "thanks, but no thanks?"
Here's a really good NPR story about this.
...the money did not go back to Washington. It stayed in Alaska for a different road project.
She endorsed the multimillion dollar project during her gubernatorial race in 2006. And while she did take part in stopping the project after it became a national scandal, she did not return the federal money. She just allocated it elsewhere.
she expressed support for the Bridge to Nowhere earmark as well. “I do support the infrastructure projects that are on tap here in the State of Alaska that our Congressional delegations worked hard for,” Ms. Palin saidWhen will the mainstream media grow the balls it needs to call a liar a liar?
Here's a really good NPR story about this.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)

