18 November, 2009

Happy Hour Discurso

Today's opining on the public discourse.

The burning stupid seems to have an endless source of fuel.  I don't know where Cons find it.  I don't know how a relatively small handful of people can keep up such a sustained effort to appear as fucktarded as they possibly can.  Even the dumbest people I know sometimes act as if they've herded two brain cells together and corralled them long enough to appear semi-wise.  But not Cons.

And certainly not Rep. John Shadegg:
Shadegg spoke from the House floor to rail against a criminal trial for alleged 9/11 conspirators in New York City. In particular, the far-right Arizonan was incensed that NYC Mayor Michael Bloomberg (I) believes, "It is fitting that 9/11 suspects face justice near the World Trade Center site where so many New Yorkers were murdered."

As Matt Finkelstein reported, Shadegg doesn't see it quite the same way. "I saw the Mayor of New York said today, 'We're tough. We can do it,'" the Republican congressman said. "Well, Mayor, how are you going to feel when it's your daughter that's kidnapped at school by a terrorist? How are you going to feel when it's some clerk -- some innocent clerk of the court -- whose daughter or son is kidnapped? Or the jailer's little brother or little sister?"

As a matter of decency, Shadegg's little tantrum was vile and unnecessary. If Shadegg has a policy argument to make, fine. But openly speculating on the House floor about imaginary kidnappings of the mayor's daughter is loathsome, even by the standards of congressional Republicans.
Matters of decency have never mattered to Shadegg.  I hope the good people of Arizona are taking notes.

But our former Attorney General's trying to outdo him in the vile rhetoric department:
Last week, Rep. Jim Moran (D-VA) came out in strong support of Attorney General Eric Holder’s decision to prosecute the five 9/11 defendants in U.S. federal court and sharply criticized Republicans who were attacking the decision. “They will seize on any opportunity to [demagogue], and that means they’ll even take a stand that’s un-American. It’s un-American to hold anyone indefinitely without trial. It’s against our principles as a nation.”

Former Bush attorney general Michael Mukasey is one of the Republicans who has been speaking out against Holder. Last week at a Federalist Society conference, Mukasey said that holding the trial in Manhattan increased the risk of a terrorist attack on the city.

In an interview with Washington Times radio this morning, the hosts asked Mukasey about Moran’s comments. Mukasey responded by suggesting that the congressman “get professional help” from Maj. Nidal Hasan:
Q: Congressman Jim Moran of Virginia says anybody that questions KSM coming to New York City for a civilian trial — that they’re un-American. What is your reaction to that?
MUKASEY: I think he’s lost touch with reality. He ought to get professional help, perhaps from Maj. Nidal.
The segment then ends with the hosts laughing over Mukasey’s “joke.”

I think that one gets filed under "Things funny only to Con shitheels."

Pete Hoekstra and friends think that blaming Maj. Nidal's little rampage on the Obama administration is the way to go:

Rep. Pete Hoekstra (R-MI) is ramping up his campaign to use the Fort Hood shootings to paint the Obama administration as soft on terrorism.

At a press conference today, where he was joined by several GOP colleagues, Hoekstra, the ranking Republican on the House Intelligence committee, called for an immediate congressional investigation into the shootings, to determine whether the intelligence community needs enhanced tools to combat terror. Hoekstra and his colleagues also suggested, without citing evidence, that the administration had restricted the use of crucial terror-fighting tools that could have been used to stop the attacks.
Hoekstra and Rep. Mike Rogers (R-MI) charged that terror-fighting tools used until recently by the intelligence community had lately been restricted or placed off limits by the administration. "We know that there are tools and methods that were in use just a few months ago are not in use today," said Rogers. "That is a problem."

The GOPers declined to say which tools they were referring to, or to produce any other evidence to back up their claim. Nonetheless, they blamed the Obama administration's political philosophy. Rogers referred to the administration's decisions to close Guantanamo and to try Khalid Sheikh Mohammed in a civilian court as examples of the administration's approach, before declaring: "There are certain tools and methods that are used by the intelligence community that can be impacted by that kind of political philosophy."
Isn't this typical?  Blame the Dems for not seeing a madman snap (do they really want to play the "should've seen it coming card?  Really?  Because if so, I have a memo they should read), throw around vague accusations of compromising national security without any proof, and expect us all to swallow their bullshit whole.  These fucktards really have no morals, no sense of decency, and no shame.  None.

Distinctly lacking in the gray matter department, as well.

Oh, and in case anyone's wondering, their mouthpieces on Faux News - y'know, the ones who spend all their time pretending to love America soooo much more than those Dirty Dems - don't give a shit about the Constitution:
Since Attorney General Eric Holder announced his decision to move five Guantanamo Bay detainees — including Khalid Sheikh Mohammad — to New York for civilian trials on charges related to the Sept. 11, 2001 terror attacks, Fox News personalities have been up in arms. Karl Rove called it a “long-standing plot” by the Obama administration’s “left-wing lawyers who do not love America.”

But last night on Fox, the network’s top legal analyst Judge Andrew Napolitano — who has been known to disagree with Fox’s right-wing narratives on legal issues — disputed that view, citing the constitutional right to be tried in the place where the crime has been committed. “I don’t care about the Constitution!” host Bill O’Reilly responded. The debate continued:
O’REILLY: So why is he entitled to come to New York City to be tried in the civilian criminal court if he’s arrested in Pakistan?
NAPOLITANO: Because the document you don’t want me to talk about says when the government is going to prosecute you, it must do so in the place where the alleged harm was caused.

I don't understand how you can claim you love this country, and then say you don't care about its Constitution.  The Constitution, ladies and gentlemen, is the fucking foundation of the United States of America.   So allow me to borrow a phrase from the rabid right: if you don't like it, leave.

Motherfucking shit-spewing fucking assholes.

Sorry.  They've pissed me off more than usual lately.  But there is good news: Inhofe's little attempt to prevent the Obama administration from closing Gitmo failed miserably.  Ha, motherfucker, ha!

And in other happy news, Sen. Sessions's little filibuster party didn't work out so well.  Kinda hard when you're being such a douchebag that even your fellow douchebags don't feel like partying with you, innit?

All you need to know about the state of the conservative moment: Rep. Chaffetz thinks Carrie Prejean would make a fine politician.  Seriously.  That's right: lil miss homophobe, pure and innocent as the driven snow until the sex tapes come out, too stupid to realize that breaking her contract will get her stripped of the Miss America crown, would make an awesome rep, in Rep. Chaffetz's opinion.  Wow.

Sarah Palin's chances of becoming POTUS just got a lot lower.  You don't lie to Oprah.  You just don't.  I mean, hell, even most conservatives don't want Palin running for prez.  I don't know about the others, but Joe Scarborough prefers Dick Cheney.

Excuse me a second.  I think I need to go vomit.

Let's have some news that will make us feel better: C-Street, that den of iniquity masquerading as a church, but really the bunkhouse for such shining examples of Con morality as Mark "Appalachian Trail" Sanford and John "Daddy Will You Pay Off My Mistress" Ensign, has lost its tax exempt status.  If you're a believer, make a joyful noise unto the Lord.  Atheists don't need to make a joyful noise to anyone in particular.  Just giggle in any direction you like.

Speaking of religious matters, Billo wants to know if Lou Dobbs thinks Obama is Satan.  Seriously.  What was that, a job interview question for Faux News?

And in further religious matters, the American Family Association drew a bead, squeezed off the first shot in this year's War on Christmas, and immediately needed medical attention for the bullet holes in their feet.

Back to pollyticks: Dems should already know this after the health care reform debacle, but just in case they need reminding, Chuck Grassley is not their friend.  He's definitely not their friend when it comes to greening our economy and our world.

And, finally, the Washington Times proves that Faux News is not the only ostensibly "mainstream" news outlet that likes to show what outrageous racist assclowns they are:
Washington Times editor Wesley Pruden trashed President Obama in his column today, which wouldn't ordinarily be especially interesting. The right-wing writer, however, touched on a specific kind of attack that illustrates a larger trend.

In this case, Pruden is all worked up because the president bowed before the Japanese Emperor. Pruden believes Obama doesn't understand "American history" because "the essence of America is that all men stand equal and are entitled to look even a king, maybe particularly a king, straight in the eye."

That's nice rhetoric, which would be more compelling were it not for the various photos of Presidents Eisenhower, Nixon, and H.W. Bush bowing before foreign leaders during their respective tenures. I've looked for related columns of Pruden trashing these Republican presidents for forgetting "the essence of America," but can't seem to find any.

But the key to the column is the wrap-up:
...Mr. Obama, unlike his predecessors, likely knows no better, and many of those around him, true children of the grungy '60s, are contemptuous of custom. Cutting America down to size is what attracts them to "hope" for "change." It's no fault of the president that he has no natural instinct or blood impulse for what the America of "the 57 states" is about. He was sired by a Kenyan father, born to a mother attracted to men of the Third World and reared by grandparents in Hawaii, a paradise far from the American mainstream.

It's a shame such reminders are necessary in the 21st century, but I'd like to note that America isn't a country club or fraternity reserved for the white, wealthy elite. Obama's story is a uniquely American story. Some of us take pride in such things. The notion that we must judge citizens based on a right-wing understanding of "natural instincts" or "heritage" -- more generations = more American -- is an idea that offends everything our country stands for.
Offending everything our country stands for seems to be a Con specialty.  Well, that and destroying our economy, getting us stuck in useless wars, and throwing endless tantrums.

Never let it be said they aren't fucktards of many talents.

1 comment:

Woozle said...

"Mr. Obama ... likely knows no better, and many of those around him ... are contemptuous of custom."

Just to point out the obvious: this is in a paragraph which is criticizing Obama for following custom.

It just doesn't happen to be our custom, so that means Cons are against it.

Paging Defenders of the Republican Way Jonathan "But isn't it unfair [of liberals] to impose on all cultures a definition of morality drawn from the European Enlightenment tradition?" Haidt and Michael "Republican voters tend to be more nuanced and sophisticated than Democratic voters" Barone -- contradiction clean-up in aisle 5...

(...and on that subject, if anyone is looking for a good dust-up, feel free to drop by and read the debate currently in progress under the "Responses" section of this page. Yeah, it's still my turn...)