Good monologue - especially the Gingrich and Marcus Bachmann bits, but he so tanked out as a coward by not calling Whoreanna I'm-Bill's-Mommy Fuckington out on her hypocrisy. And ... PLEASE ... it's PRESIDENT Obama. (Plus some racially-oriented jokes)
So Bill thinks the second term for the President is more important than the first because it will be seen as a racially-tinged indictment that the first black President failed? Who the hell has spent the past three years, bar this current one, absolutely pissing on anything the President achieved, making racist comments about him and pushing the narrative that he was weak? Right. Bill Maher.
Two Virginians on the panel. And Bill couldn't get into UVa.
I agree with Col Wilkerson. NATO is no longer relevant for us or for itself. Good point by Ed Schultz, the other Virginian. Willard's remark about Jimmy Carter was low rent. Even more low rent than the Republicans' idea of the President pushing the meme that he got Bin Laden.
Sponge Bob gets his fifteen minutes of fame on Bill's show!!
The end of this, with the clip of Romney making jokes only a rich Republican could make on someone's estate, is absolutely priceless.
A briiliant takedown of the total disconnect of Willard. Watch:-
And here's a little ditty from back during the time when Willard was dodging the draft. Maybe this should become his campaign song, as it describes the sort of scary Presidency we'd get with him in the White House.
This Republican Carpetbagger is an embarrassment to the Commonwealth. And if, heaven forbid, that Willard becomes President and Sponge Bob Square Pants Lacquered Hair should be the Vice-President, he will be as big a disgrace to the country as Darth Cheney.
Bob lies so much, he doesn't know when he's lying. And the non-campaign campaign ads are just tacky.
Way back in 2006, one of the first things Tim Kaine did as Governor of Virginia was to issue an executive order, which insured that people could not face discrimination by their employer because of their sexual orientation.
We have discussed a number of important issues such as the Federal Employment Non-Discrimination Act (ENDA), which I have agreed to co-sponsor, and if possible broaden to include housing and credit, and a bill to create a federal panel to find ways to reduce gay and lesbian youth suicide, which I also support. One issue I want to clarify concerns President Clinton's "don't ask, don't tell, don't pursue" military policy. I believe that the Clinton promise was a step in the right direction. I am also convinced that it is the first of a number of steps that will ultimately lead to gays and lesbians being able to serve openly and honestly in our nation's military. That goal will only be reached when preventing discrimination against gays and lesbians is a mainstream concern, which is a goal we share.
So, when Willard was hoping to upend the legend that was Ted Kennedy, he was all for enforciing protection for LGBT citizens against discrimination on a national level - i.e., via the Federal government.
Fast forward to Willard's first attempt to secure the 2008 Republican nomination. Picture the scenario. The Republican Party had moved even further to the Right and closer to the precipice which signifies the end of the flat earth in which they believe. Then (and now) not only was it fashionable to keep your gays in the closet, you had to proclaim homosexuality a virulent sin to be avoided at all costs.
Thus speaketh the Religious Right in control of the Republican Party.
In an interview in 2007 with the late Tim Russert on Meet the Press - surprise surprise - it appears Willard had changed his mind.
RUSSERT: You said that you would sponsor the Employment Nondiscrimination Act. Do you still support it?
ROMNEY: At the state level. I think it makes sense at the state level for states to put in provision of this.
RUSSERT: Now, you said you would sponsor it at the federal level.
ROMNEY: I would not support at the federal level, and I changed in that regard because I think that policy makes more sense to be evaluated or to be implemented at the state level. And let me describe why.
RUSSERT: So you did–you did change.
ROMNEY: Oh, Tim, if you’re looking for someone who’s never changed any positions on any policies, then I’m not your guy.
So now, Willard's position has "evolved" to mean that, whilst he still supports protection of LGBT citizens against discrimination in the workplace, he just doesn't want the Federal government to enact or enforce any law as such. He'd really rather now the states do it. Individually, you know ... almost like a states' rights thing.
And that means you get what we got in Virginia back in 2010, whenever a Bob McDonnell or a John Kasich or a Scott Walker nabs the Statehouse.
One of the main criticisms EmoProgressives, led by their spokesbitch spokesperson, Arianna Huffington, who is as much in touch with the common man as Willard is, himself, levelled at the President during the past four years is that he is a man without backbone. He caves. He folds. They have carried this message so far as actually to undermine the President's message on any number of occasions. In doing that, they effected the Democrats' loss of the House of Representatives, and assured that the President's position, going into the 2012 election theatre, isn't as strong as it should have been.
Several such people on the Left, have actually decided to sit out this election, saying that if Willard should win, he's moderate enough to endure for four years whilst the mysterious Progressive political army gains untold strength in preparation for the 2016 election.
The lack of a spine makes flipflopping easy, and Willard has this down to an art. Those who are turning away from a President because he didn't wave a pen and legalise pot or give them single-payer health insurance may come to see in Willard what a real spineless politician looks like.
They should also remember something from their science teaching as well (before that subject is taken off the school curriculum): that invertebrates are the lowest form of life.
In days of yore, when a King employed (such as was employment in the Middle Ages) a court jester, the clown had the distinct privilege of being able to poke criticism at a King and his policies under the guise of comedy. That's probably how satire evolved.
Today, comedians - those who don't think of themselves as political pundits - are supposed to do that; but once annually, at the White House Correspondents' Dinner celebrityfest, the President gets to turn the tables and get in a few digs at his own critics ... in a purely sporting way, of course.
The President is only human, and he's an intelligent man; so bitchy ratfuckery amongst people who purport to be from his side of the political spectrum simply wouldn't go unnoticed - especially when that bitchy ratfuckery emanates from a person who jumps at the earliest opportunity to be on the White House guest list for any occasion.
Watch the President's comic takedown of Arianna Huffington. Listen to the tone of his voice, and watch his body language. This was more than a joke. This was a long overdue and well-deserved smack.
I thought that was positively wonderful. A Southern girl couldn't have passed a backhanded compliment better to someone she disdained. Our President sure did learn a lot from his Southern mamma. Because that was a coded message to Queen Ratfucker Omnipotent of Medialand. Put bluntly, the President was saying, "I got your number, baby, and I know what you're about."
Being less of a Southern lady and more of an open bitch, I'd have pointed out that Newt and Callista were in the room also, and would Arianna be meeting up with them at the Mayflower Hotel later in the evening?
His attitude, his inflection, even the look on his face and the cadence of his words revealed beyond a shadow of a doubt that the President was very prescient of the game Huffington was playing and had been playing ever since he'd taken office - one, which she played with an evil vengeance especially during the Midterm campaign of 2010, wherein she presented herself as a more viable champion of the Middle Class instead of the President.
The result was the Do-Nothing-Know-Nothing Congress which pretends to function today, dominated by the Party which claimed Huffington's allegiance for most of her adult sojourn in America.
Anyway, the woman who likes to think of herself as the epitome of professional journalism reacted just a wee bit unprofessionally and came up with this, quasi-endorsement of Mitt Romney - at least in respect of the President using his achievement of ridding the world of Osama bin Laden as political fodder, compared with a remark made by Willard five years ago indicating that it wasn't worth the time, the effort or the money to track down one man. Her reaction was petty, vindictive, bitter and the epitome of a vengeful bitch.
Appearing on CBS This Morning, she ranted:-
“I don’t think there should be an ad about that. I think it’s one thing to celebrate the fact that they did such a great job, it’s one thing to have an NBC special from the ‘Situation Room’ … all that to me is perfectly legitimate, but to turn it into a campaign ad is one of the most despicable things you can do,” said Huffington on “CBS This Morning.”
So "despicable" is the latest pejorative adjective Huffington has used in describing this President. I'll tell you what's despicable ... unpaid labour used in the 21st Century to garner even more millions for Arianna Huffington. As the President said with subtle sarcasm, that's a great business model, and one of which only a Republican would be proud - but then, this is the woman who learned all she knows on her knees at the foot of Newt Gingrich - he, who would happily reinstate child labour.
Do you need any more proof? Well, just let me remind you of this:-
And this:-
Cosy, yes?
At the end of the day, we know why Huffington is stabbing the knife deep within the President's back (which, as she ceaselessly reminds us, is spineless) and twisting the blade. Yes, we know she's a ratfucker, and like the Republican brand (brands being so close to Arianna's heart), she knows very well how to distract the public's attention from the real issues surrounding this election and how very important it is that the President wins. You see, if she keeps us hyperventilating about "despicable" Obama, "spineless" Obama, "Nowhere Man" Obama - all of which are clever euphemisms for what she really wants her readers and listeners to say in the depths of their minds ... Black Obama ... then we'll miss the point entirely about the significance of retaining President Obama's services for another four years.
I won’t play along. It’s not a game, particularly if you are one of the millions of Americans stretching your body and mind to their limits to make the ends meet. It’s not a game if you don’t make money from outrage, but are outraged by how little money you have. It’s not a game if you fear, rightfully, that your “unalienable rights” to “life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness” are being treated as an alien concept — threatened or denied altogether.
So before I start hyperventilating myself, I’m going to throw up my hands and throw down a gauntlet. I’m going to give you meat. You can get your cake elsewhere.
Let’s talk about the importance of the president in determining the composition of the Supreme Court and the critical role the court is playing in our lives.
Nominating Supreme Court justices is one of the most profound and enduring legacies of any presidency, and yet the subject gets so little airtime that Americans display a staggering degree of misunderstanding of the court and dissatisfaction with it.
(snip)
In his first term, Obama has appointed Sonia Sotomayor and Elena Kagan, two relatively liberal justices. Not only has Mitt Romney chosen Robert Bork, a rejected Supreme Court nominee, as one of the chairmen of his Justice Advisory Committee, he has made it clear that he will choose extremely conservative justices.
"Supreme Court" is the only phrase you need remember when you're thinking about how to vote in November ... the other word is "corporations." And for all you diehard Progressives or limousine liberals who still worship at Arianna's corrupt altar, you'd do well to remember that she's now a corporation also, and she's been looking for the perfect opportunity to ditch the President and enter into the sacred fold of the Republican party like a self-perpetuating virgin, a status which I'm certain she's claimed for herself as well.
I know ... We're the side who's supposed to be for immigration, but if we ever needed an argument against this, here are two of the best reasons why it's not really smart to just let anyone in the country:-
and
There goes the neighbourhood when riffraff like this come in the back door.
Question: Does anybody see anything wrong with this political advert?
Because I don't.
First, it's politics and it's an election year. Of course, a President trying for re-election is going to harp for all it's worth on his major achievements; and say what you will about President Obama, Right and Left, finding and killing Osama bin Laden was one of the signature pieces of his foreign policy.
Putting it bluntly, bagging bin Laden occurred on President Obama's watch. It was an extremely risky procedure, and it worked. If Dubya Bush had achieved this, prior to 2004, he would have rammed that fact down the throats of political pundits nationwide, and people would have responded resoundingly at the polls. If the same act had happened after the 2004 election, we'd be looking at President McCain today.
Achievements of this nature are political goldmines for candidates aspiring for either election or re-election. As for Bush, here was his attitude toward bin Laden, only six months after 9/11:-
Bin Laden, according to Bush, was "marginalised." He was not someone about whom the President chose to accord much thought (not that Bush accorded much thought to anything in particular, but there you go).
But, at the same time, Bush wasn't afraid to lend his response to the events of 9/11 to his own re-election efforts in 2004, and he was, in an covert and indirect way, aided and abetted by an audiotaped message from Mr Marginalised, someplace deep in the mountains of Pakistan or wherever.
That message from bin Laden basically scared the living shit out of most voters and sent them to the polls for Bush.
Their main gripe, however, on this anniversary of bin Laden's death is the abovementioned political advert for the President which - what else? - touts his successful dispatch of bin Laden, and also reminds the public of a public remark made by Willard back in 2007, when he was gearing up for his first run for President of the United States. That remark basically stated that it was not worth moving heaven and earth and spendig trillions of dollars just to track down one person, even if that one person were Osama bin Laden.
So the Democrats played politics and played the Republicans at their own game, because anyone who doesn't think a Republican candidate would not have picked up a Democrat making a remark like this and made political hay while the sunshines is just this side of stupid.
So, the President insinuates that Romney wouldn't have made the call ... that's a pretty fair assumption, based on Romney's actual remark and Bush's earlier one about the relative unimportance of bin Laden only six months after the Towers fell. And it irks the Republicans to be handed their asses in the sort of political advert for which they (and such ilk as Frank Luntz) are famous.
Remember this one from 2004, impugning the character of John Kerry?
The Republicans took a fact and used it against the Democratic candidate who was behind that fact.
And now, when it's done to them, they whinge and whine that it's not fair, that it's dirty politcs ... that it's divisive.
Pappy McCain and George Pataki, amongst others, have had a moan about how mean the advert is. But what's worse ... it's brought the ratfucking brigade charging from the woodwork.
Queen Ratfucker Omnipotent of MediaLandWhoreanna Fuckington Arianna Huffington took to the airwaves on CBS This Morning to do what she's done best for the past four years: piss on every achievement the President has accomplished. Here's what this noted political pundit and plagiarist had to say:
"Using the Osama bin Laden assassination, killing, the great news that we had a year ago, in order to say basically that Obama did it and Romney might not have done it ... to turn it into a campaign ad is one of the most despicable things you can do."
"It's also what makes politicians and political leaders act irrationally when it comes to matter of war, because they're so afraid to be called wimps that they make decisions which are incredibly destructive to the country. "
Such actions offend the delicate sensiblities of Madame, the same Madame, who trolled the United States on the eve of the 2010 Midterms, reminding the public that the President "just wasn't into" the middle class. This is the same Madame, who referred to the President as "nowhere man."
This is the same Madame who was once known as Newt's Muse and who led the rabble against President Clinton, campaigning online for his impeachment. This is the same Madame, who - along with the late Andrew Breitbart - founded the online rag known as The Huffington Post, ostensibly a Progressive organ, but - in reality - a subversive apparatus designed to sow disaffection and dissatisfaction amongst the lesser intellectually-endowed Progressive population.
This is the same Madame, who not only voted twice for George W Bush, but contributed to his campaign fund. And this is the same Madame whose unpaide slave labourers staff at HuffPo look like charter members of the Young Republicans.
I don't see anything wrong with crowing about a singular achievement of a particular Administration, nor calling out words spoken on the record by your political opponent, which more than imply that he would have reacted differently, given the situation.
Now, it's also time for Democrats to start fighting back against the words spoken by someone who, in her lifetime, has held three different passports, whose journalistic record is peppered with plagiarism and who hasn't held an elective office in her life. Huffington is practicing Class A ratfuckery and really wants nothing more than to see the Republicans, whom she nurtured at her toxic bosom for decades, back in power led by a President to whose top-flight social status she aspires.
She should remember that when Icarus flew too close to the sun, his wings melted. Let's melt Madame's botox.
