FORD
11-14-2005, 12:13 PM
The Top 10 Conservative Idiots (No. 222)
http://www.democraticunderground.com/top10/05/222.jpg
November 14, 2005 Down The Tubes Edition
Things aren't looking too good for George W. Bush (1,2,3,5) these days. The poor guy just can't get a break, whether it's supporting losing candidates, spoiling Veterans' Day for everybody, or pretending that "we do not torture." Elsewhere, Bill Frist and Dennis Hastert (4) put on a comedy show, Bill O'Reilly (6) hates America, Arnold Schwarzenegger (7) takes it to the people, and Pat Robertson (10) accidentally takes a crap on "Intelligent Design." Enjoy.......
1) George W. Bush
What's it like to be the captain of a sinking ship? Ask George W. Bush, whose political fortunes went from bad to worse to plain atrocious last week. First, our Great leader gambled that a campaign appearance with Virginia gubernatorial candidate Jerry Kilgore would push Kilgore over the top, thus causing pundits to flagellate themselves in an orgy of repentance while crying from the rooftops that George W. Bush is BACK!!!
Here's Dubya explaining why Jerry Kilgore is the man for the job:
http://www.democraticunderground.com/top10/05/222_bush1.jpg
(Cheer up, Mr. Blueshirt. It's not that bad.)
Bush was most complimentary of Kilgore. "I hope you'll work hard tomorrow to call up your friends and neighbors, and tell them they have a duty in this democracy of ours to vote..." he told the crowd. "Tell them if they want good government - good, solid, sound conservative government - to put this good man in the governor's chair in Richmond."
"See, I know a man of character and integrity," Bush continued, "and he's standing right next to me. And that's Jerry Kilgore ... The thing I like about this fellow is he grew up in Virginia, and he grew up on a small farm. That means he's a down-to-earth person. He doesn't have a lot of fancy airs. That's the kind of guy you want to represent you, a person who understands how the common man thinks..."
Bush is of course an expert on this subject, considering that he:
* Comes from Connecticut
* Has an Ivy League education
* Once owned a Major League Baseball team
* Vacations at a private compound in Kennebunkport
* On a yacht
* With champagne and caviar
But I'm getting off the subject. The point of all this is that once the people of Virigina had done their duty in this democracy of ours, Jerry Kilgore was left in the dust by his Democratic opponent Tim Kaine. In 2004 Virigina went for Bush by 8 percentage points - in 2005, Virginia went for Kaine by 6 percentage points.
All I can say is: please please please campaign for more candidates next year, George! :)
2) George W. Bush
Speechifying hasn't exactly been Our Great Leader's strong point lately - last week he decided to ruin a Veterans' Day event by turning it into a pre-2004 election campaign rally. Feeling the heat from critics over his administration's cooking of intelligence prior to the Iraq war, Bush clearly thought that the best place to strike back would be at a ceremony to honor America's veterans. How thoughtful.
Bush started off by telling some lies about all the great things his administration has done for veterans (yeah, right) and then launched into his favorite topic - you guessed it - September 11. "Our nation has made a clear choice," he said. "We will confront this mortal danger to all humanity. We will not tire or rest until the war on terror is won."
A clear choice, eh? That's odd - the last poll I looked at showed that a full 56% of Americans currently disapprove of Bush's handling of the war on terrorism. Almost 60% say he's dishonest too. But let's not get sidetracked - that poll has nothing to do with the real point of Dubya's speech, which was to honor veterans.
I'm joking of course. The real point of the speech was for Our Great Leader to rehash his attacks on John Kerry from the 2004 election, and slam everyone who thinks he's is a liar - which according to that poll is most people.
So let's skip the warmed-over stuff about Iraq, 9/11, Zarqawi, Zawahiri, the Taliban, Al Qaeda, Saddam Hussein - blah, blah, blah, you've heard it all before a million times. Let's move right along to...
BUSH: Our debate at home must also be fair-minded. One of the hallmarks of a free society and what makes our country strong is that our political leaders can discuss their differences openly even in times of war.
Oh really? Then I guess it wasn't Ari Fleischer who once told reporters that "all Americans ... need to watch what they say, watch what they do."
BUSH: When I made the decision to remove Saddam Hussein from power, Congress approved it with strong bipartisan support.
Interesting. So Bush made the decision to remove Saddam Hussein from power before the Iraq War Resolution vote? That doesn't jibe with statements he made at the time, such as, "Hopefully, we can do this peacefully. And if the world were to collectively come together to do so, and to put pressure on Saddam Hussein and convince him to disarm, there's a chance he may decide to do that. And war is not my first choice ... it's my last choice."
BUSH: I also recognize that some of our fellow citizens and elected officials didn't support the liberation of Iraq. And that is their right, and I respect it.
Liberation? If you mean invasion and occupation, then yeah, you're right. Some of our fellow citizens didn't support it then - and 64% of our fellow citizens don't support it now, accoring to recent polls.
BUSH: As president and commander in chief, I accept the responsibilities and the criticisms and the consequences that come with such a solemn decision.
That's a joke, right?
BUSH: While it's perfectly legitimate to criticize my decision or the conduct of the war, it is deeply irresponsible to rewrite the history of how that war began.
Yes, let's not rewrite history.
http://www.democraticunderground.com/top10/05/222_rumsfeld.jpg
BUSH: Some Democrats and anti-war critics are now claiming we manipulated the intelligence and misled the American people about why we went to war.
(snip)
Many of these critics supported my opponent during the last election, who explained his position to support the resolution in the Congress this way: "When I vote to give the president of the United States the authority to use force, if necessary, to disarm Saddam Hussein, it is because I believe that a deadly arsenal of weapons of mass destruction in his hands is a threat and a grave threat to our security."
That's why more than 100 Democrats in the House and the Senate, who had access to the same intelligence, voted to support removing Saddam Hussein from power.
Okay, one last question: if all those Democrats in the House and the Senate had access to the same intelligence... why didn't Colin Powell? :confused:
3) George W. Bush
Yes, new documents revealed last week demonstrate that not only were Democrats in the House and Senate seriously misled by Bush administration propaganda, but Colin Powell himself might not have been given the full picture.
The declassified CIA documents show that the Bush administration's own intelligence community had serious doubts about claims that Al Qaeda and Saddam Hussein were working together, even as administration officials were making those claims publicly. The documents were only recently provided to Sen. Carl Levin, a member of the Senate Armed Services Committee, which kinda undercuts Our Great Leader's claim that everyone had access to the same intelligence.
According to Newsweek,
"The new documents also raise the possibility that caveats raised by intelligence analysts about (intelligence source) al-Libi's claims were withheld from Powell when he was preparing his Security Council speech. Larry Wilkerson, who served as Powell's chief of staff and oversaw the vetting of Powell's speech, responded to an e-mail from Newsweek Wednesday stating that he was unaware of the CIA doubts about al-Libi at the time the speech was being prepared."
Oh, sure the Democratic senators and representatives, along with the secretary of state, all had access to the same intelligence - it just happened to be missing a few pieces, that's all. Nothing important. Just the bits that proved the whole thing was bullshit.
4) Bill Frist and Dennis Hastert
There were more hilarious shenanigans from Congress's answer to Laurel and Hardy as Bill Frist and Dennis Hastert were thoroughly embarrassed by former Senate Majority Leader Trent Lott last week.
Frist and Hastert came out spitting nails after the Washington Post published a story about secret CIA detention centers in Eastern Europe. Desperate to regain some political credibility after the devastating Valerie Plame leak investigation, Frist and Hastert were keen to turn the tables on Democrats by calling for a new probe.
"If accurate, such an egregious disclosure could have long-term and far-reaching damaging and dangerous consequences, and will imperil our efforts to protect the American people and our homeland from terrorist attacks," wrote the two top Republicans in a letter to Senate Intelligence Committee Chairman Pat Roberts.
Clearly they were attempting to smear Democrats and/or the CIA for the leak, but it didn't take too long before Trent Lott crashed the party, revealing that the secret prisons were discussed at a regularly-held Republicans-only senate luncheon the day before the Post report appeared. "We can't keep our mouths shut. We have met the enemy, and the enemy is us," said Lott.
Whoops! This put Pat Roberts in the awkward position of having to not-so-quietly suggest to Frist and Hastert that Congress shouldn't push for an investigation into the leak, at least until after Bush's Department of Justice has looked into the matter. So I guess the Republican leadership isn't that concerned about leaks after all.
Or secret torture prisons, come to think of it. :(
5) George W. Bush and Dick Cheney
Speaking of secret torture prisons, you will be pleased to know that despite all the evidence to the contrary, George W. Bush emphatically announced last week that, "We do not torture." Thank goodness for that! And pay no attention to those classified Eastern European detention centers. You've heard of Six Flags Guantanamo Bay, right? Well those other centers just encompass what the Bush administration likes to call Eastern Euro-Disney.
The problem with Bush's "we don't torture" claim is that his own vice-president was last week frantically trying to persuade the Senate to give the CIA an exemption from a bill which contained language banning "cruel, inhuman or degrading" treatment of prisoners in U.S. custody.
So let's see... George W. Bush says "we do not torture," and Dick Cheney wants a special exemption for the CIA from anti-torture laws... gee, this is really confusing. I don't know what to think. Perhaps I'll see if they're discussing this on Fox News.
........
Okay, just got done watching Fox News. It's okay! Nobody panic! We do not torture! And even if we do, well, they deserve it.
Oh, and by the way, Scooter Libby did nothing wrong. And even if he did, well, obstruction of justice isn't a real crime.
Thanks for the info, Fox News! :p
6) Bill O'Reilly
Our old friend Bill O'Reilly has said some pretty egregious shit over the years, but last week he went way over the line. After 60% of San Franciscans voted to prohibit on-campus military recruiting in public schools and colleges last week, here's what The Falafel Master had to say:
Hey, you know, if you want to ban military recruiting, fine, but I'm not going to give you another nickel of federal money. You know, if I'm the president of the United States, I walk right into Union Square, I set up my little presidential podium, and I say, "Listen, citizens of San Francisco, if you vote against military recruiting, you're not going to get another nickel in federal funds. Fine. You want to be your own country? Go right ahead.
And if Al Qaeda comes in here and blows you up, we're not going to do anything about it. We're going to say, look, every other place in America is off limits to you, except San Francisco. You want to blow up the Coit Tower? Go ahead.
Um, correct me if I'm wrong, but did Bill O'Reilly just invite Al Qaeda to destroy an American city? :eek:
I guess it wouldn't be the first time that a conservative idiot has suggested that terrorists target a particular American landmark. Back in 2002 Ann Coulter told an interviewer that "My only regret with Timothy McVeigh is he did not go to the New York Times Building."
Oh, right-wing lunatics, why do you hate America? :(
7) Arnold Schwarzenegger
You know, I actually feel a bit sorry for Arnold Schwarzenegger - he just found out that governing a state isn't the same as being a movie star. Sure, it took him a while to reach this conclusion, but at least he's there now.
Before last week's elections, Gov. Groping Austrian Beefcake promised to bypass the Democratically-controlled state legislature and take his message directly to the people. "I believe the people, I represent the people,'' said. "I don't represent the polls. The people sent me to Sacramento.''
And last week the people told Arnie to piss off, rejecting all four of his ballot initiatives.
Schwarzenegger remained upbeat though, and did something that George W. Bush finds it practically impossible to do - he took responsibility. "The buck stops with me," he said last week. "I take full responsibility for this election. I take full responsibility for its failure."
See, Republicans? That's how it's done.
Mind you, Arnie might not have paid attention to all the lessons that could be learned from this experience. He also told reporters, "If I was to make another 'Terminator' movie, I would tell Terminator to travel back in time to tell Arnold not to have another special election."
Uh, governor - I don't want to be a party pooper, but now might be a good time to think about dropping that incredibly annoying "Look at me, I am ze Terminator" stuff. It's just that, well, it makes you look like a dildo. :D
8) Bob Riley
Natalee Holloway's disappearance is a tragedy to her friends and family, but I'm really not sure why this particular case has garnered hundreds of hours of air time on cable news. Oh wait - I know why. It's because cable news SUCKS.
But the utter pointlessness of the endless speculation on the Alabama teen's fate does not appear to have put off Alabama's governor Bob Riley, who jumped on the Natalee Bandwagon last week by announcing that Americans should boycott Aruba.
"There are no other alternatives to get Aruban authorities to take this as seriously as they should," Riley said. According to the Associated Press, "Riley was asked if parents should allow their children to go to Aruba on similar trips as long as Holloway's disappearance is unsolved. 'I would not allow my daughter to go to Aruba,' he said."
Perhaps the governor should start looking a little closer to home. Last week DUer TahitiNut helpfully provided a shortlist of children who have gone missing in Alabama since Natalee Holloway's disappearance. From the National Center for Missing and Exploited Children:
LACRISA DARLENE EAGLE
-Endangered Runaway
DOB: Apr 1, 1992 Age: 13
Missing: Sep 5, 2005 Race: White
GADSDEN, Alabama, US
JASMINE VALENCIA
-Endangered Missing
DOB: Dec 7, 1999 Age: 5
Missing: Aug 27, 2005 Race: Biracial
MOBILE, Alabama, US
JAYDA VALENCIA
-Endangered Missing
DOB: Jan 3, 2002 Age: 3
Missing: Aug 27, 2005 Race: Biracial
MOBILE, Alabama, US
JASMINE SHARDAE HUDSON
-Endangered Runaway
DOB: May 15, 1990 Age: 15
Missing: Jun 20, 2005 Race: Black
MONTGOMERY, Alabama, US
NAKETA DARRELL HAMPTON
-Endangered Missing
DOB: Dec 21, 1994 Age: 10
Missing: Aug 29, 2005 Race: Black
ATMORE, Alabama, US
NIKITA SHAREE EAGLE
-Endangered Runaway
DOB: Aug 24, 1990 Age: 15
Missing: Sep 5, 2005 Race: White
GADSDEN, Alabama, US
And they aren't the only ones. So what are we to make of this? I guess the conclusion that Bob Riley would have us reach is that we should start boycotting Alabama.
9) Crybaby Republicans
Let's face it, we Dems have done our fair share of wallowing in electoral defeat over the past few years. But at least we haven't started literally beating the shit out of each other. Last week, reeling from their election losses, members of the Berlin (Connecticut) Republican party started a brawl. Let's go to the tape:
"Bob got right in my face," said Republican town committee member David Martin. "He grabbed my neck, and then he got his fingernails behind my windpipe. I was just trying to push his hands away."
"David came in the building and started making vile comments to me," said Councilman Paul Argazzi. "Vile and disgusting comments about my wife and my mother, which I can't repeat."
Wow. :eek:
According to the Hartford Courant, "The alleged assault occurred after the Republicans learned they been soundly defeated by the Democrats. A heated discussion took place between Martin and Paul Argazzi in which, Martin said, he questioned whether Paul Argazzi was still the leader of the Republican Party."
And I thought the adults were supposed to be in charge. :D
10) Pat Robertson
And finally, you may have noticed that proponents of so-called "Intelligent Design" have been very careful to avoid any mention of the word "God" while promoting their ideas. There's a good reason for this - Intelligent Design, which is intended to undermine the scientifically-sound theory of Evolution, is essentially Creationism wrapped up in a more politically correct package. The Intelligent Design Network describes ID thusly:
We believe objectivity in the institutions of science, government and the media will lead not only to good origins science, but also to constitutional neutrality in this subjective, historical science that unavoidably impacts religion. We promote the scientific evidence of intelligent design because proper consideration of that evidence is necessary to achieve not only scientific objectivity but also constitutional neutrality.
Sounds good, right? And not a word about Genesis, or the Garden of Eden, or God.
Unfortunately Pat Robertson just blew all their hard work out of the water by issuing one of his famous "Patwas" on the voters of Dover, PA, who last week swept local school board officials out of office for supporting Intelligent Design. Here's Pat's reaction to the voters' decision:
"I'd like to say to the good citizens of Dover. If there is a disaster in your area, don't turn to God, you just rejected Him from your city. And don't wonder why He hasn't helped you when problems begin, if they begin. I'm not saying they will, but if they do, just remember, you just voted God out of your city. And if that's the case, don't ask for His help because he might not be there."
But... but... but... I thought Intelligent Design had nothing to do with Pat Robertson's god? I thought that it was "simply the science of design detection." I thought that it "should be conducted objectively, without regard to the implications of its findings." By the looks of Pat's reaction, I guess not.
Funnily enough, a staunch proponent of ID changed his mind on the subject last week - on November 5 the Indianapolis Star reported that Rick Santorum "has put the Senate on record in favor of teaching both sides." But on November 12, Santorum said that he "doesn't believe that intelligent design belongs in the science classroom."
Now why would a senator of such strong convictions suddenly flip-flop on the teaching of Intelligent Design?
Surely the fact that his likely 2006 opponent Bob Casey is currently holding a 20 point lead in the polls has got nothing to do with it.
See you next week!
http://www.democraticunderground.com/top10/05/222.jpg
November 14, 2005 Down The Tubes Edition
Things aren't looking too good for George W. Bush (1,2,3,5) these days. The poor guy just can't get a break, whether it's supporting losing candidates, spoiling Veterans' Day for everybody, or pretending that "we do not torture." Elsewhere, Bill Frist and Dennis Hastert (4) put on a comedy show, Bill O'Reilly (6) hates America, Arnold Schwarzenegger (7) takes it to the people, and Pat Robertson (10) accidentally takes a crap on "Intelligent Design." Enjoy.......
1) George W. Bush
What's it like to be the captain of a sinking ship? Ask George W. Bush, whose political fortunes went from bad to worse to plain atrocious last week. First, our Great leader gambled that a campaign appearance with Virginia gubernatorial candidate Jerry Kilgore would push Kilgore over the top, thus causing pundits to flagellate themselves in an orgy of repentance while crying from the rooftops that George W. Bush is BACK!!!
Here's Dubya explaining why Jerry Kilgore is the man for the job:
http://www.democraticunderground.com/top10/05/222_bush1.jpg
(Cheer up, Mr. Blueshirt. It's not that bad.)
Bush was most complimentary of Kilgore. "I hope you'll work hard tomorrow to call up your friends and neighbors, and tell them they have a duty in this democracy of ours to vote..." he told the crowd. "Tell them if they want good government - good, solid, sound conservative government - to put this good man in the governor's chair in Richmond."
"See, I know a man of character and integrity," Bush continued, "and he's standing right next to me. And that's Jerry Kilgore ... The thing I like about this fellow is he grew up in Virginia, and he grew up on a small farm. That means he's a down-to-earth person. He doesn't have a lot of fancy airs. That's the kind of guy you want to represent you, a person who understands how the common man thinks..."
Bush is of course an expert on this subject, considering that he:
* Comes from Connecticut
* Has an Ivy League education
* Once owned a Major League Baseball team
* Vacations at a private compound in Kennebunkport
* On a yacht
* With champagne and caviar
But I'm getting off the subject. The point of all this is that once the people of Virigina had done their duty in this democracy of ours, Jerry Kilgore was left in the dust by his Democratic opponent Tim Kaine. In 2004 Virigina went for Bush by 8 percentage points - in 2005, Virginia went for Kaine by 6 percentage points.
All I can say is: please please please campaign for more candidates next year, George! :)
2) George W. Bush
Speechifying hasn't exactly been Our Great Leader's strong point lately - last week he decided to ruin a Veterans' Day event by turning it into a pre-2004 election campaign rally. Feeling the heat from critics over his administration's cooking of intelligence prior to the Iraq war, Bush clearly thought that the best place to strike back would be at a ceremony to honor America's veterans. How thoughtful.
Bush started off by telling some lies about all the great things his administration has done for veterans (yeah, right) and then launched into his favorite topic - you guessed it - September 11. "Our nation has made a clear choice," he said. "We will confront this mortal danger to all humanity. We will not tire or rest until the war on terror is won."
A clear choice, eh? That's odd - the last poll I looked at showed that a full 56% of Americans currently disapprove of Bush's handling of the war on terrorism. Almost 60% say he's dishonest too. But let's not get sidetracked - that poll has nothing to do with the real point of Dubya's speech, which was to honor veterans.
I'm joking of course. The real point of the speech was for Our Great Leader to rehash his attacks on John Kerry from the 2004 election, and slam everyone who thinks he's is a liar - which according to that poll is most people.
So let's skip the warmed-over stuff about Iraq, 9/11, Zarqawi, Zawahiri, the Taliban, Al Qaeda, Saddam Hussein - blah, blah, blah, you've heard it all before a million times. Let's move right along to...
BUSH: Our debate at home must also be fair-minded. One of the hallmarks of a free society and what makes our country strong is that our political leaders can discuss their differences openly even in times of war.
Oh really? Then I guess it wasn't Ari Fleischer who once told reporters that "all Americans ... need to watch what they say, watch what they do."
BUSH: When I made the decision to remove Saddam Hussein from power, Congress approved it with strong bipartisan support.
Interesting. So Bush made the decision to remove Saddam Hussein from power before the Iraq War Resolution vote? That doesn't jibe with statements he made at the time, such as, "Hopefully, we can do this peacefully. And if the world were to collectively come together to do so, and to put pressure on Saddam Hussein and convince him to disarm, there's a chance he may decide to do that. And war is not my first choice ... it's my last choice."
BUSH: I also recognize that some of our fellow citizens and elected officials didn't support the liberation of Iraq. And that is their right, and I respect it.
Liberation? If you mean invasion and occupation, then yeah, you're right. Some of our fellow citizens didn't support it then - and 64% of our fellow citizens don't support it now, accoring to recent polls.
BUSH: As president and commander in chief, I accept the responsibilities and the criticisms and the consequences that come with such a solemn decision.
That's a joke, right?
BUSH: While it's perfectly legitimate to criticize my decision or the conduct of the war, it is deeply irresponsible to rewrite the history of how that war began.
Yes, let's not rewrite history.
http://www.democraticunderground.com/top10/05/222_rumsfeld.jpg
BUSH: Some Democrats and anti-war critics are now claiming we manipulated the intelligence and misled the American people about why we went to war.
(snip)
Many of these critics supported my opponent during the last election, who explained his position to support the resolution in the Congress this way: "When I vote to give the president of the United States the authority to use force, if necessary, to disarm Saddam Hussein, it is because I believe that a deadly arsenal of weapons of mass destruction in his hands is a threat and a grave threat to our security."
That's why more than 100 Democrats in the House and the Senate, who had access to the same intelligence, voted to support removing Saddam Hussein from power.
Okay, one last question: if all those Democrats in the House and the Senate had access to the same intelligence... why didn't Colin Powell? :confused:
3) George W. Bush
Yes, new documents revealed last week demonstrate that not only were Democrats in the House and Senate seriously misled by Bush administration propaganda, but Colin Powell himself might not have been given the full picture.
The declassified CIA documents show that the Bush administration's own intelligence community had serious doubts about claims that Al Qaeda and Saddam Hussein were working together, even as administration officials were making those claims publicly. The documents were only recently provided to Sen. Carl Levin, a member of the Senate Armed Services Committee, which kinda undercuts Our Great Leader's claim that everyone had access to the same intelligence.
According to Newsweek,
"The new documents also raise the possibility that caveats raised by intelligence analysts about (intelligence source) al-Libi's claims were withheld from Powell when he was preparing his Security Council speech. Larry Wilkerson, who served as Powell's chief of staff and oversaw the vetting of Powell's speech, responded to an e-mail from Newsweek Wednesday stating that he was unaware of the CIA doubts about al-Libi at the time the speech was being prepared."
Oh, sure the Democratic senators and representatives, along with the secretary of state, all had access to the same intelligence - it just happened to be missing a few pieces, that's all. Nothing important. Just the bits that proved the whole thing was bullshit.
4) Bill Frist and Dennis Hastert
There were more hilarious shenanigans from Congress's answer to Laurel and Hardy as Bill Frist and Dennis Hastert were thoroughly embarrassed by former Senate Majority Leader Trent Lott last week.
Frist and Hastert came out spitting nails after the Washington Post published a story about secret CIA detention centers in Eastern Europe. Desperate to regain some political credibility after the devastating Valerie Plame leak investigation, Frist and Hastert were keen to turn the tables on Democrats by calling for a new probe.
"If accurate, such an egregious disclosure could have long-term and far-reaching damaging and dangerous consequences, and will imperil our efforts to protect the American people and our homeland from terrorist attacks," wrote the two top Republicans in a letter to Senate Intelligence Committee Chairman Pat Roberts.
Clearly they were attempting to smear Democrats and/or the CIA for the leak, but it didn't take too long before Trent Lott crashed the party, revealing that the secret prisons were discussed at a regularly-held Republicans-only senate luncheon the day before the Post report appeared. "We can't keep our mouths shut. We have met the enemy, and the enemy is us," said Lott.
Whoops! This put Pat Roberts in the awkward position of having to not-so-quietly suggest to Frist and Hastert that Congress shouldn't push for an investigation into the leak, at least until after Bush's Department of Justice has looked into the matter. So I guess the Republican leadership isn't that concerned about leaks after all.
Or secret torture prisons, come to think of it. :(
5) George W. Bush and Dick Cheney
Speaking of secret torture prisons, you will be pleased to know that despite all the evidence to the contrary, George W. Bush emphatically announced last week that, "We do not torture." Thank goodness for that! And pay no attention to those classified Eastern European detention centers. You've heard of Six Flags Guantanamo Bay, right? Well those other centers just encompass what the Bush administration likes to call Eastern Euro-Disney.
The problem with Bush's "we don't torture" claim is that his own vice-president was last week frantically trying to persuade the Senate to give the CIA an exemption from a bill which contained language banning "cruel, inhuman or degrading" treatment of prisoners in U.S. custody.
So let's see... George W. Bush says "we do not torture," and Dick Cheney wants a special exemption for the CIA from anti-torture laws... gee, this is really confusing. I don't know what to think. Perhaps I'll see if they're discussing this on Fox News.
........
Okay, just got done watching Fox News. It's okay! Nobody panic! We do not torture! And even if we do, well, they deserve it.
Oh, and by the way, Scooter Libby did nothing wrong. And even if he did, well, obstruction of justice isn't a real crime.
Thanks for the info, Fox News! :p
6) Bill O'Reilly
Our old friend Bill O'Reilly has said some pretty egregious shit over the years, but last week he went way over the line. After 60% of San Franciscans voted to prohibit on-campus military recruiting in public schools and colleges last week, here's what The Falafel Master had to say:
Hey, you know, if you want to ban military recruiting, fine, but I'm not going to give you another nickel of federal money. You know, if I'm the president of the United States, I walk right into Union Square, I set up my little presidential podium, and I say, "Listen, citizens of San Francisco, if you vote against military recruiting, you're not going to get another nickel in federal funds. Fine. You want to be your own country? Go right ahead.
And if Al Qaeda comes in here and blows you up, we're not going to do anything about it. We're going to say, look, every other place in America is off limits to you, except San Francisco. You want to blow up the Coit Tower? Go ahead.
Um, correct me if I'm wrong, but did Bill O'Reilly just invite Al Qaeda to destroy an American city? :eek:
I guess it wouldn't be the first time that a conservative idiot has suggested that terrorists target a particular American landmark. Back in 2002 Ann Coulter told an interviewer that "My only regret with Timothy McVeigh is he did not go to the New York Times Building."
Oh, right-wing lunatics, why do you hate America? :(
7) Arnold Schwarzenegger
You know, I actually feel a bit sorry for Arnold Schwarzenegger - he just found out that governing a state isn't the same as being a movie star. Sure, it took him a while to reach this conclusion, but at least he's there now.
Before last week's elections, Gov. Groping Austrian Beefcake promised to bypass the Democratically-controlled state legislature and take his message directly to the people. "I believe the people, I represent the people,'' said. "I don't represent the polls. The people sent me to Sacramento.''
And last week the people told Arnie to piss off, rejecting all four of his ballot initiatives.
Schwarzenegger remained upbeat though, and did something that George W. Bush finds it practically impossible to do - he took responsibility. "The buck stops with me," he said last week. "I take full responsibility for this election. I take full responsibility for its failure."
See, Republicans? That's how it's done.
Mind you, Arnie might not have paid attention to all the lessons that could be learned from this experience. He also told reporters, "If I was to make another 'Terminator' movie, I would tell Terminator to travel back in time to tell Arnold not to have another special election."
Uh, governor - I don't want to be a party pooper, but now might be a good time to think about dropping that incredibly annoying "Look at me, I am ze Terminator" stuff. It's just that, well, it makes you look like a dildo. :D
8) Bob Riley
Natalee Holloway's disappearance is a tragedy to her friends and family, but I'm really not sure why this particular case has garnered hundreds of hours of air time on cable news. Oh wait - I know why. It's because cable news SUCKS.
But the utter pointlessness of the endless speculation on the Alabama teen's fate does not appear to have put off Alabama's governor Bob Riley, who jumped on the Natalee Bandwagon last week by announcing that Americans should boycott Aruba.
"There are no other alternatives to get Aruban authorities to take this as seriously as they should," Riley said. According to the Associated Press, "Riley was asked if parents should allow their children to go to Aruba on similar trips as long as Holloway's disappearance is unsolved. 'I would not allow my daughter to go to Aruba,' he said."
Perhaps the governor should start looking a little closer to home. Last week DUer TahitiNut helpfully provided a shortlist of children who have gone missing in Alabama since Natalee Holloway's disappearance. From the National Center for Missing and Exploited Children:
LACRISA DARLENE EAGLE
-Endangered Runaway
DOB: Apr 1, 1992 Age: 13
Missing: Sep 5, 2005 Race: White
GADSDEN, Alabama, US
JASMINE VALENCIA
-Endangered Missing
DOB: Dec 7, 1999 Age: 5
Missing: Aug 27, 2005 Race: Biracial
MOBILE, Alabama, US
JAYDA VALENCIA
-Endangered Missing
DOB: Jan 3, 2002 Age: 3
Missing: Aug 27, 2005 Race: Biracial
MOBILE, Alabama, US
JASMINE SHARDAE HUDSON
-Endangered Runaway
DOB: May 15, 1990 Age: 15
Missing: Jun 20, 2005 Race: Black
MONTGOMERY, Alabama, US
NAKETA DARRELL HAMPTON
-Endangered Missing
DOB: Dec 21, 1994 Age: 10
Missing: Aug 29, 2005 Race: Black
ATMORE, Alabama, US
NIKITA SHAREE EAGLE
-Endangered Runaway
DOB: Aug 24, 1990 Age: 15
Missing: Sep 5, 2005 Race: White
GADSDEN, Alabama, US
And they aren't the only ones. So what are we to make of this? I guess the conclusion that Bob Riley would have us reach is that we should start boycotting Alabama.
9) Crybaby Republicans
Let's face it, we Dems have done our fair share of wallowing in electoral defeat over the past few years. But at least we haven't started literally beating the shit out of each other. Last week, reeling from their election losses, members of the Berlin (Connecticut) Republican party started a brawl. Let's go to the tape:
"Bob got right in my face," said Republican town committee member David Martin. "He grabbed my neck, and then he got his fingernails behind my windpipe. I was just trying to push his hands away."
"David came in the building and started making vile comments to me," said Councilman Paul Argazzi. "Vile and disgusting comments about my wife and my mother, which I can't repeat."
Wow. :eek:
According to the Hartford Courant, "The alleged assault occurred after the Republicans learned they been soundly defeated by the Democrats. A heated discussion took place between Martin and Paul Argazzi in which, Martin said, he questioned whether Paul Argazzi was still the leader of the Republican Party."
And I thought the adults were supposed to be in charge. :D
10) Pat Robertson
And finally, you may have noticed that proponents of so-called "Intelligent Design" have been very careful to avoid any mention of the word "God" while promoting their ideas. There's a good reason for this - Intelligent Design, which is intended to undermine the scientifically-sound theory of Evolution, is essentially Creationism wrapped up in a more politically correct package. The Intelligent Design Network describes ID thusly:
We believe objectivity in the institutions of science, government and the media will lead not only to good origins science, but also to constitutional neutrality in this subjective, historical science that unavoidably impacts religion. We promote the scientific evidence of intelligent design because proper consideration of that evidence is necessary to achieve not only scientific objectivity but also constitutional neutrality.
Sounds good, right? And not a word about Genesis, or the Garden of Eden, or God.
Unfortunately Pat Robertson just blew all their hard work out of the water by issuing one of his famous "Patwas" on the voters of Dover, PA, who last week swept local school board officials out of office for supporting Intelligent Design. Here's Pat's reaction to the voters' decision:
"I'd like to say to the good citizens of Dover. If there is a disaster in your area, don't turn to God, you just rejected Him from your city. And don't wonder why He hasn't helped you when problems begin, if they begin. I'm not saying they will, but if they do, just remember, you just voted God out of your city. And if that's the case, don't ask for His help because he might not be there."
But... but... but... I thought Intelligent Design had nothing to do with Pat Robertson's god? I thought that it was "simply the science of design detection." I thought that it "should be conducted objectively, without regard to the implications of its findings." By the looks of Pat's reaction, I guess not.
Funnily enough, a staunch proponent of ID changed his mind on the subject last week - on November 5 the Indianapolis Star reported that Rick Santorum "has put the Senate on record in favor of teaching both sides." But on November 12, Santorum said that he "doesn't believe that intelligent design belongs in the science classroom."
Now why would a senator of such strong convictions suddenly flip-flop on the teaching of Intelligent Design?
Surely the fact that his likely 2006 opponent Bob Casey is currently holding a 20 point lead in the polls has got nothing to do with it.
See you next week!