Top 10 Conservative Idiots #267 [Archive] - The Diamond David Lee Roth Army

View Full Version : Top 10 Conservative Idiots #267

FORD

11-06-2006, 09:42 AM

<img src="http://www.democraticunderground.com/top10/06/267.jpg" border="0"> The Top 10 Conservative Idiots, No. 267 November 6, 2006 Election Special Since this is the last Top 10 before the mid-term elections, I'm doing something a little different: I've compiled a helpful 2006 voter guide. I should say up front that I know there's going to be stuff I've missed this week, but with the GOP's political reactor approaching meltdown it was tough to get everything in. Feel free to use the discussion thread to add your own reasons why people should vote Republican this Tuesday. Enjoy! <img src="http://www.democraticunderground.com/top10/number/01.gif" border="0"> Vote Republican If You Think It's A Good Idea To Put Detailed Atom Bomb Plans On The Internet For Anyone To See Everyone knows that the Republican party is the only party you can really trust on national security. Sure, 9/11 happened on their watch. And the occupation of Iraq has created a breeding ground for terrorists and is driving anti-American sentiment throughout the Muslim world. And Iran is much closer to getting a nuclear weapon than they were in 2000. And North Korea conducted a nuclear test recently after the Bush administration ignored them for six years. But I think you'll have to admit that the Republican party is the only party which can keep America safe. After all, it takes real strength and determination to ignore most of the recommendations of the 9/11 Commission. And George W. Bush <a href="http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/releases/2006/10/20061030-4.html" target="_blank">said it himself</a> last week... with a little help from his friends: <div class="excerpt">THE PRESIDENT: When it comes to listening to the terrorists, what's the Democrats' answer? It's, just say no. When it comes to detaining terrorists, what is the Democrats' answer? Just say no. When it comes to questioning terrorists, what's the Democrats' answer? AUDIENCE: Just say no! THE PRESIDENT: When it comes to trying the terrorists, what's the Democrats' answer? AUDIENCE: Just say no!</div> See? How can you trust the Democratic party when according to Our Great Leader they simply refuse to listen to, detain, question, or try terrorists? Why, at a recent fundraiser Ted Kennedy told the assembled audience that we should divide Iraq into four parts - a region for Kurds; a region for Sunnis; a region for Shiites; and a region for terrorists called Al Qaedaland, to which we should send a generous package of foreign aid to help them get their terror training camps up and running again. And surely you remember Howard Dean saying just last month that we should apologize to Osama bin Laden and give him free tickets to Disneyworld. By the way, if you're wondering why the Bush administration hasn't been able to catch bin Laden yet, it's because, er, let's say, Hillary Clinton is hiding him in her lesbian love nest. But if you still aren't 100% sure that the Republican party is the party of national security, then let me put the issue to rest. Last week the New York Times <a href="http://www.nytimes.com/2006/11/03/world/middleeast/03documents.html?hp&ex=1162530000&en=1511d6b3da302d4f&ei=5094&partner=homepage" target="_blank">reported</a> that for the better part of a year, the Bush administration has posted on a public website "detailed accounts of Iraq's secret nuclear research before the 1991 Persian Gulf war. The documents, the experts say, constitute a basic guide to building an atom bomb." <div class="excerpt">The documents, roughly a dozen in number, contain charts, diagrams, equations and lengthy narratives about bomb building that nuclear experts who have viewed them say go beyond what is available elsewhere on the Internet and in other public forums. For instance, the papers give detailed information on how to build nuclear firing circuits and triggering explosives, as well as the radioactive cores of atom bombs.</div> Why were these extremely sensitive documents available for anyone to read? <a href="http://news.yahoo.com/s/afp/20061103/tc_afp/usiraqnuclearinternet_061103151349" target="_blank">According to</a> the AFP: <div class="excerpt">The US government posted the bomb-related documents on a website set up last March to make available to the public a huge archive of Iraqi government papers, hoping that the public would help sift through the archive for useful information government translators did not have time to search for.</div> Makes perfect sense. When faced with large numbers of old Iraqi documents that you don't have time to translate, just throw 'em all up on a website and hope that helpful members of the public can sort it out for you. And if they turn out to be plans for building a nuke... well, what can you do. So who's it gong to be, America? The party who actually posted detailed instructions for building an atom bomb, in Arabic, on a public website for nine months - or the party of the woman who, if you believe what some people are saying, could very well be hiding Osama bin Laden in her lesbian love nest? I think you know the answer. <img src="http://www.democraticunderground.com/top10/number/02.gif" border="0"> Vote Republican If You Want To Stay The Course In Iraq Just as most Americans know that the Republican party is clearly the party of national security, they also have high regard for the GOP's handling of Iraq. Now, I know they didn't send enough troops, and they lied to America about the consequences and cost of an invasion, and they mismanaged the occupation so badly that Iraq is now fighting a civil war, and sure, almost 3,000 U.S. troops are dead, but come on - give the Republican party another chance. Once again, I'll let George W. Bush <a href="http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/releases/2006/10/20061030-4.html" target="_blank">define the choice</a> between Democrats and Republicans on this issue: <div class="excerpt">THE PRESIDENT: However they put it, the Democrat approach in Iraq comes down to this: The terrorists win and America loses. That's what's at stake in this election. The Democrat goal is to get out of Iraq. The Republican goal is to win in Iraq.</div> Isn't it obvious? No matter how many more soldiers have to die, no matter how many more Iraqi civilians are killed, no matter how uncontrollable the situation becomes, the Republican goal is to win, baby! Yeah! And you can't win unless you stay the course, which I think you'll have to admit has been working really well so far. After all, how many terrorists have struck America since the last time? None! And as long as we stay in Iraq, they never will again. So let's take a quick look at some of the stories coming out of Iraq over the past week, and see how Our Great Leader's plan for victory is working: <div class="excerpt"><a href="http://www.nytimes.com/2006/11/03/world/middleeast/03reconstruct.html?hp&ex=1162616400&en=590b5ef31979d828&ei=5094&partner=homepage" target="_blank">Congress Tells Auditor in Iraq to Close Office</a> Investigations led by a Republican lawyer named Stuart W. Bowen Jr. in Iraq have sent American occupation officials to jail on bribery and conspiracy charges, exposed disastrously poor construction work by well-connected companies like Halliburton and Parsons, and discovered that the military did not properly track hundreds of thousands of weapons it shipped to Iraqi security forces. And tucked away in a huge military authorization bill that President Bush signed two weeks ago is what some of Mr. Bowen's supporters believe is his reward for repeatedly embarrassing the administration: a pink slip. The order comes in the form of an obscure provision that terminates his federal oversight agency, the Office of the Special Inspector General for Iraq Reconstruction, on Oct. 1, 2007. The clause was inserted by the Republican side of the House Armed Services Committee over the objections of Democratic counterparts during a closed-door conference, and it has generated surprise and some outrage among lawmakers who say they had no idea it was in the final legislation.</div> <div class="excerpt"><a href="http://www.time.com/time/world/article/0,8599,1554399,00.html" target="_blank">Shock and Anger in Baghdad Greet the Abu Ghraib News</a> Even for a people used to waking up to the sound of explosions, Iraqis were jolted by a Friday morning bombshell: the news, first reported on time.com, that Sgt. Santos Cardona, viewed here as one of the villains of Abu Ghraib, has been ordered back to the country. Although Iraqi and Arab media have been slow to pick up on the story (the news cycle here tends to be a day or two behind the U.S.) many in Baghdad read about it online, and word quickly spread. The reaction was predictable: total outrage. "This is America spitting in our face," said Imad al-Hashimi, a Baghdad paediatrician. "The sheer arrogance of it is unbelievable." </div> <div class="excerpt"><a href="http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_topic&forum=385&topic_id=1545" target="_blank">Jack Cafferty: Bush abandons captive US soldier in Iraq</a> Iraqi shiites celebrated in the streets yesterday when American solders lifted those checkpoints around Sadr City in Baghdad. That area had been blockaded while U.S. and Iraqi troops looked for a kidnapped American soldier. But Iraqi prime minister Nouri al-Maliki demanded the American checkpoints come down, and they did. And who controls Sadr City? Muqtada al-Sadr, the commander of Iraq's most feared militia. al-Sadr made it clear this week: if those checkpoints weren't removed, his forces might retaliate. And the prime minister knows that he needs the support of al-Sadr, and his militia, if he wants to successfully govern Iraq. The American embassy in Baghdad insists that the decision to remove those checkpoints was made after a meeting between al-Maliki and top U.S. officials, and a military spokesman was adamant that U.S. soldiers moved the checkpoints on their commanders' orders. But it doesn't really matter, does it? By removing the checkpoints the United States is in effect handing over the fate of the kidnapped American soldier to the Shiite militia. This country has a long and proud tradition of never abandoning its soldiers on the battlefield, and we ought to be ashamed of ourselves for this little stunt they pulled.</div> <div class="excerpt"><a href="http://www.mercurynews.com/mld/mercurynews/news/politics/15909192.htm" target="_blank">Bush: Cheney, Rumsfeld 'are doing fantastic jobs'</a> President Bush said Wednesday that he wants Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld and Vice President Dick Cheney to remain with him until the end of his presidency, extending a job guarantee to two of the most-vilified members of his administration. "Both those men are doing fantastic jobs, and I strongly support them," Bush said in an interview with the Associated Press and others.</div> So there you have it folks - once again the choice is clear. And if you still have doubts, let me remind you that if you vote for a Democrat this Tuesday you're going to to feel pretty darn left out when George W. Bush rides that glorious victory train all the way to triumph town. <img src="http://www.democraticunderground.com/top10/number/03.gif" border="0"> Vote Republican If You Think The President Should Get Advice On Gay-Bashing From A Pastor Who Secretly Bangs Male Prostitutes Of course, we all know that the Republicans are the party of morals and values - they've been telling us that for years. And yes, okay, to believe that, you have to ignore Mark Foley, Philip Giordano, John Schmitz, Carey Lee Cramer, Neal Horsley, Jack Ryan, Henry Hyde, Mike Hintz, Bob Livingston, John Gosek, Newt Gingrich, Jim West, Randal David Ankeney, Parker J. Bena, and Lou Beres. And Don Sherwood, Tom Shortridge, Bobby Stumbo, Larry Jack Schwarz, Jeffrey Patti, Marty Glickman, Richard A. Delgaudio, Howard Scott Heldreth, Edison Misla Aldarondo,and Jon Grunseth. (While you're waiting for the election results to come in on Tuesday night, feel free to entertain yourself by Googling all these names.) But this week there's a very special new addition to the Republican Morals and Values crew - Pastor Ted Haggard, leader of the National Association of Evangelicals. Well, former leader actually - he resigned last week after a male prostitute alleged that Haggard used to meet up with him for methamphetamine-fueled bum fun. Whoops. <a href="http://www.timesonline.co.uk/article/0,,3-2436254,00.html" target="_blank">According to</a> the London Times: <div class="excerpt">The claims were made by Mike Jones, a male escort from Denver, who told the media that Mr Haggard had paid him to have sex every month for nearly three years. He claimed that the Reverend had snorted methamphetamine before their sexual encounters in order to heighten the experience, an allegation also denied by Mr Haggard. Mr Jones said that he had voicemail messages from Mr Haggard as well as an envelope allegedly used to send him cash, which provided evidence of their secret trysts. "There's some stuff on there (the voice mails) that's pretty damning," he said.</div> Of course, Haggard is stridently opposed to gay marriage and all things queer. In an <a href="http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_topic&forum=385&topic_id=2119" target="_blank">excerpt</a> from the documentary "Jesus Camp," Haggard says, "We don't have to debate about what we should think about homosexual activity - it's written in the Bible!" He then looks directly into the camera. "I think I know what you did last night," he tells the cameraman, to laughter from the audience. "If you send me a thousand dollars, I won't tell your wife." Oh, the irony. So how did Haggard handle these tricky revelations? Well, in an interview with Denver's Channel 9 News last week, he first "denied he'd used drugs or had gay sex, saying he's been faithful to his wife," <a href="http://www.denverpost.com/ci_4588998" target="_blank">according to</a> the Denver Post. Unfortunately <a href="http://www.latimes.com/news/nationworld/nation/la-ex-haggard3nov04,0,3668135.story?coll=la-home-headlines" target="_blank">word came out quickly</a> that: <div class="excerpt">New Life's acting pastor said Haggard had acknowledged some of the accusations were true, according to the Associated Press. In an e-mail to congregants, Ross Parsley wrote that the church's four-member board of overseers had met with Haggard. "It is important for you to know that he confessed to the overseers that some of the accusations against him are true. He has willingly and humbly submitted to the authority of the board of overseers, and will remain on administrative leave during the course of the investigation," the e-mail stated.</div> Next, ABC News <a href="http://abcnews.go.com/US/wireStory?id=2627142" target="_blank">reported</a> that: <div class="excerpt">Haggard denied the sex allegations but said that he did buy meth from the man because he was curious. "I bought it for myself but never used it," he said. "I was tempted, but I never used it." Haggard, a married father of five, said he never had sex with Mike Jones, a 49-year-old male prostitute who sparked the scandal when he told a radio station he had had a three-year sexual relationship with the minister. He said he did get a massage from Jones after being referred to him by a Denver hotel.</div> I see... so he didn't use meth, but he did buy some out of curiosity. And he didn't have sex with Jones, but he did get a massage from him. Apparently Haggard has never heard of the phrase "damage control." So what does this have to do with the 2006 elections? Well, it turns out that Pastor Ted Haggard is an adviser to the Bush White House, talking to the president by phone every Monday and giving him spiritual advice on matters of social import. At least, that's what this Harpers <a href="http://www.harpers.org/SoldiersOfChrist-20061103288348488.html" target="_blank">article</a> says: <div class="excerpt">Pastor Ted, who talks to President George W. Bush or his advisers every Monday, is a handsome forty-eight-year-old Indianan, most comfortable in denim.</div> So when you cast your ballot this Tuesday, make morals and values an important part of your decision. You can go with the Democrats, who shamelessly and publicly express their support for homosexuals, or the real party of morals and values, the Republicans, who take weekly advice on how best to trash gays from a pastor who allegedly cheats on his wife by shagging male prostitutes while snorting crank. Postscript: it's nice to see the White House confirming David Kuo's <a href="http://www.beliefnet.com/story/160/story_16092_1.html" target="_blank">speculation</a> that George W. Bush doesn't care about religious people. <a href="http://www.cnn.com/2006/US/11/03/haggard.allegations/index.html" target="_blank">According to</a> CNN, "Last year, Time - citing Haggard's White House access - put him on its list of the nation's 25 most influential evangelicals." But last Friday, "the White House sought to downplay Haggard's influence within the administration. Spokesman Tony Fratto told reporters Friday that it was inaccurate to portray him as being close to the White House, insisting Haggard was only an occasional participant in weekly conference calls between West Wing staff and leading evangelicals." Post-postscript: also slightly strange to see Haggard <a href="http://www.cnn.com/2006/US/11/05/haggard.allegations" target="_blank">run out of his church on a rail</a> by the end of the day Saturday for "sexually immoral conduct." What happened to "hate the sin, love the sinner?" <img src="http://www.democraticunderground.com/top10/number/04.gif" border="0"> Vote Republican If You Think The Best Way To Deal With A Child Predator Is To Cover Your Own Ass Ask anyone and they'll tell you that the Republican Party is the party that will keep your kids safe. After all, when top GOP leaders found out about Rep. Mark Foley and his "overly-friendly" (ie. pornographic) emails to congressional pages, they immediately contacted the Page Board and began investigating the matter. Well not exactly. What they actually did was hold a series of conference calls to minimize the political fallout and figure out how best to spin the issue. <a href="http://blogs.nydailynews.com/dailypolitics/archives/2006/11/exclusive_nrccs.php" target="_blank">According to</a> the New York Daily News: <div class="excerpt">Two senior aides to National Republican Campaign Committee Chairman Tom Reynolds participated in "damage control" conference calls concerning correspondence between Congressman Mark Foley and a former congressional page - two days before the scandal became public, and earlier than previously reported. NRCC Communications Director Carl Forti and Reynolds then chief-of-staff Kirk Fordham both took part in the first call the evening of Wednesday, September 27, and one call the next day, Forti and other sources familiar with the call confirmed. Forti's involvement and the NRCC's role in the run-up to the Foley scandal add another link between the disgraced former congressman and Reynolds, who has said he knew only indirectly of questionable emails, and that he reported them to his House superiors. They also reflect another moment at which House GOP leadership was aware of concerns about Foley and pages.</div> So vote Republican this Tuesday! And sleep soundly at night knowing that if something untoward does happen to your kids, the GOP leadership will do everything in their power to spin it.

FORD

11-06-2006, 09:43 AM

<img src="http://www.democraticunderground.com/top10/number/05.gif" border="0"> Vote Republican If You Hate The Military Henry Kissinger <a href="http://en.wikiquote.org/wiki/Henry_Kissinger" target="_blank">once said</a>, "Military men are dumb, stupid animals to be used as pawns for foreign policy." But hey, that was back in the 1970s. He probably thinks differently these days, what with being one of the <a href="http://thinkprogress.org/2006/09/28/woodward-book/" target="_blank">chief Iraq advisers to the Bush White House</a> and all. Not like John Kerry, who volunteered for combat duties in Vietnam, won numerous medals, and screwed up a joke about George W. Bush last week. That guy really hates the troops. But Kissinger's comment - and Bush's <a href="http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/americas/3570845.stm" target="_blank">cracks</a> about not finding WMDs, and Rumsfeld's <a href="http://www.cnn.com/2004/WORLD/meast/12/08/rumsfeld.troops/" target="_blank">observation</a> about going to war "with the army you have, not the army you want" - aside, we all know the Republican party is the party that really supports the military. Take John Boehner, for example. Last week the House Majority Leader did an interview on CNN and stuck up for the troops <a href="http://www.marinetimes.com/story.php?f=1-292925-2328683.php" target="_blank">thusly</a>: <div class="excerpt">In a Wednesday appearance on CNN, Boehner was asked for his view on Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld and the U.S. policy in Iraq. "There are a lot of people who want to blame what’s happening in Iraq on Donald Rumsfeld, but when you look at the transformation that our military has been through, it’s nothing short of remarkable," Boehner said. "The fact is, the generals on the ground are in charge." Boehner acknowledged that "there have been mistakes along the way," but did not blame Rumsfeld.</div> So there you have it - according to the number two Republican in the House, the disaster in Iraq is all the fault of the military, and in no way can the civilian planners in the Pentagon be held responsible. Unfortunately, it seems that the military doesn't really agree with Boehner. According to a <a href="http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/blogs/sfgate/indexn/detail?blogid=16&entry_id=10582" target="_blank">joint editorial</a> which is scheduled to appear this Monday in the Army Times, Air Force Times, Navy Times, and Marine Corps Times: <div class="excerpt">For two years, American sergeants, captains and majors training the Iraqis have told their bosses that Iraqi troops have no sense of national identity, are only in it for the money, don't show up for duty and cannot sustain themselves. Meanwhile, colonels and generals have asked their bosses for more troops. Service chiefs have asked for more money. And all along, Rumsfeld has assured us that things are well in hand. Now, the president says he'll stick with Rumsfeld for the balance of his term in the White House. This is a mistake. It is one thing for the majority of Americans to think Rumsfeld has failed. But when the nation's current military leaders start to break publicly with their defense secretary, then it is clear that he is losing control of the institution he ostensibly leads.</div> Hmm. Incidentally, Boehner was later asked if he planned to apologize for blaming the Iraq quagmire solely on the generals. His response? "Good try." <img src="http://www.democraticunderground.com/top10/number/06.gif" border="0"> Vote Republican If You Like People Who'll Say Literally Anything To Get Elected If there's one thing the Republican party is known for, it's personal responsibility. In the final week of the run-up to the mid-term elections, there was plenty of it on display. Perhaps the best example came from Rep. Deborah Pryce (R-OH), who has been an extremely strong supporter of the war in Iraq. And I mean an extremely strong supporter. In fact, Pryce's opponent, Democrat Mary Jo Kilroy, has helpfully provided a <a href="http://www.kilroyforcongress.com/2006/11/pryce_quotes_deborah_pryce_wrong_on_the_war_in_ira q.htm" target="_blank">list of Pryce's quotes</a> about the Iraq war on her website. Let's take a look: <div class="excerpt">"I didn't see any chaos. Everything seemed pretty normal" (Columbus Dispatch, 10/24/03) "Colleagues of ours who have been there talk of wheat fields and oil fields and cotton fields. This is progress. It is a beautiful picture of what comes of our noble pursuit in the fight for freedom and the war against terror" (Columbus Dispatch, 10/16/03) "I'm really in awe as to what has been accomplished here...There is tremendous progress...Americans should be encouraged by the fact that this country is going to turn around" (Columbus Dispatch, 10/24/03) "The Iraqi people are beginning new lives of liberty and freedom" (Congressional Record, 5/6/04) "Iraq is now a beacon of freedom." (Columbus Dispatch, 6/28/05) The people of Iraq "are liberated and they are happy in their freedom" (Columbus Dispatch, 10/13/06)</div> Good stuff eh? But at the end of last week, a strange thing happened. <a href="http://www.cnn.com/2006/POLITICS/11/02/pryce.iraq/index.html" target="_blank">According to CNN</a>: <div class="excerpt">The seven-term representative is the House Republican Caucus chairwoman, the fourth highest-ranking position in the House. She won re-election in 2004 with 62 percent of the vote. However, experts say her current race with Democrat Mary Jo Kilroy is a toss-up. ... When pressed by CNN on whether her position as a House leader connected her to the volatile situation in Iraq, Pryce objected to the interruption of her remarks and said the interview was over. "Thanks, I'm done," Pryce said. She expressed frustration and walked away saying, "Maybe we'll call you later when I'm feeling better." In a statement issued to CNN later, Pryce finished her response, writing, "What's happening in Iraq is not a direct reflection on me."</div> Deborah, say it ain't so! What happened to that beautiful picture of wheat fields you were painting just now? <img src="http://www.democraticunderground.com/top10/number/07.gif" border="0"> Vote Republican If You Think The Best Way To Answer A Tough Question Is To Have Your Questioner Beaten Up When Republicans took control in 2000, their rallying cry was, "The adults are back in charge!" And they've been acting like adults ever since. Last week, Mike Stark of CallingAllWingnuts.com went to an Allen appearance and <a href="http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_topic&forum=385&topic_id=1690" target="_blank">asked the senator</a> whether or not he was going to release his arrest records. Then he asked what was in Allen's sealed divorce records, and whether the rumors were true that he had spit on his first wife. Here's what happened next (Stark is on the left in the first picture): <center><img src="http://www.democraticunderground.com/top10/06/267_stark1.jpg" border="0"></center> <center><img src="http://www.democraticunderground.com/top10/06/267_stark2.jpg" border="0"></center> <center><img src="http://www.democraticunderground.com/top10/06/267_stark3.jpg" border="0"></center> <center><img src="http://www.democraticunderground.com/top10/06/267_stark4.jpg" border="0"></center> <center><img src="http://www.democraticunderground.com/top10/06/267_stark5.jpg" border="0"></center> <center><img src="http://www.democraticunderground.com/top10/06/267_stark6.jpg" border="0"></center> <center><img src="http://www.democraticunderground.com/top10/06/267_stark7.jpg" border="0"></center> <center><img src="http://www.democraticunderground.com/top10/06/267_stark9.jpg" border="0"></center> If you think that looks bad, wait until you see <a href="http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=385x846" target="_blank">the video</a>. So Mike Stark asks a tough question, and Allen's staffers beat him to the ground. Charming. But don't worry - it's not their fault. <a href="http://www.jacksonville.com/apnews/stories/110106/D8L4KCL02.shtml" target="_blank">According to</a> the Associated Press: <div class="excerpt">Republican Sen. George Allen on Wednesday refused to denounce his supporters' manhandling a liberal blogger a day earlier and accused his Democratic opponent, Jim Webb, of provoking the videotaped incident.</div> Makes sense. Never mind the fact that Stark has got nothing to do with Webb's campaign - Allen's thugs' assault on a private citizen is clearly the fault of Jim Webb. How could a reasonable person see it any other way? Thanks goodness the adults are in charge.

FORD

11-06-2006, 09:44 AM

<img src="http://www.democraticunderground.com/top10/number/08.gif" border="0"> Vote Republican If You Think That Laws Are For Other People When it comes to law and order, you know you can trust Republicans. Take Ann Coulter for example. I noted back in <a href="http://www.democraticunderground.com/top10/06/233.html" target="_blank">Idiots 233</a> that she was under investigation for knowingly voting in the wrong precinct during a local election. Coulter also allegedly falsified the address on her voter registration. Unfortunately for our Ann, that's a felony in Florida. So how's the investigation going? Well, <a href="http://articles.news.aol.com/news/_a/coulter-refuses-to-cooperate-in-voting/20061101151909990004?ncid=NWS00010000000001" target="_blank">according to</a> the Associated Press: <div class="excerpt">Conservative columnist Ann Coulter has refused to cooperate in an investigation into whether she voted in the wrong precinct, so the case will probably be turned over to prosecutors, Palm Beach County's elections chief said Wednesday.</div> Refused to cooperate? Who does she think she is, Rush Limbaugh? I must say, Ann, that's very bold of you. Especially given that: <div class="excerpt">Knowingly voting in the wrong precinct is a felony punishable by up to five years in prison.</div> Cheer up though - if the worst comes to the worst you'll be out just in time for the 2012 primaries. <img src="http://www.democraticunderground.com/top10/number/09.gif" border="0"> Vote Republican If You Think It's Cool For Congressmen To Pay Their Mistresses To Keep Quiet Until After Election Day More on morals and values: I've commented numerous times on the antics of Rep. Don Sherwood (see Idiots passim) so there's no real need to go over that ground again. But just in case you forgot, Sherwood is the Republican congressman who allegedly choked his mistress. Now the Associated Press has <a href="http://hosted.ap.org/dynamic/stories/C/CONGRESSMAN_SETTLEMENT?" target="_blank">reported</a> that Sherwood paid said mistress $500,000 to keep quiet about their affair until after election day. <div class="excerpt">The settlement, reached in November 2005, called for Cynthia Ore to be paid in installments, according to a person who spoke on condition of anonymity because the deal is confidential. She has received less than half the money so far, and will not get the rest until after the Nov. 7 election, the person said Thursday. A confidentiality clause requires Ore to forfeit some of the money if she talks publicly about the case, according to this person and two other people familiar with elements of the case.</div> So residents of Pennsylvania's 10th Congressional District, make sure to cast your vote for Rep. Sherwood this Tuesday. Because when Cynthia Ore starts giving tell-all interviews about her affair with Donny on Wednesday, you could have the privilege of being represented by the most talked-about Congressman in America! Wouldn't that be awesome? <img src="http://www.democraticunderground.com/top10/number/10.gif" border="0"> Vote Republican If You Still Think That This Crew In Congress Isn't The Most Corrupt, Hypocritical, Useless Bunch Of Asshats You've Ever Seen In Your Life And finally, I've been documenting conservative idiocy in this column for almost six years now. In those six years Republicans have had almost total control of the U.S. government - the House, the Senate and the White House (the Democrats briefly controlled the Senate in 2001 and 2002). The GOP has held onto power by literally terrorizing the American people, fooling them into believing that if Republicans aren't running the show then Uncle Sam will be shot by terrorists, crucified by atheists, and buggered by homosexuals. The politics of fear have allowed Republicans in Washington to spit on the Constitution, take away rights that human beings have relied on for centuries, abrogate their responsibility to check the power of the presidency, and ruin the lives of countless numbers of people from Iraq to New Orleans. They've done all this by following a strict doctrine of "divide and conquer," turning American against American while their cronies sit back, laugh, and rake in the cash. Most of the people who read this column will be voting Democratic this Tuesday, so I know I'm preaching to the converted here. But if you have friends, family, neighbors, or co-workers who are as disgusted by the modern Republican party as you are, make sure you get them to the polls this Tuesday. The GOP has spent the last six years telling Americans what can't be done. It will be a long road, but a Democratic victory on Tuesday can be the first step toward repairing the damage these idiots have done, and making this country great again. The ruling GOP has done its best to take away the very foundation that America is built upon - hope. This Tuesday, show them that they've failed. -- EarlG

Little Texan

11-06-2006, 05:52 PM

Don't worry, I'm voting for Democrats and Independents, ONLY, tomorrow!