When you care about the little guy, the poor man, the blue collar worker, the people breaking their backs carrying America around for only a few dollars an hour, you better watch how you behave.

That’s right: watch your ass, buster. Because if you start making more money than those poor souls you pretend to care about, you’re a hypocrite. If you spend that money, you’re a fucking scumbag. If you spend a bunch of it on your daughter’s wedding, it’s time they put your head on a pike.

Why? Because your poor buddies can’t do that, you ass.

The Wife Was Really P.O.’ed This A.M. — Chelsea’s Wedding Extravaganza
DougRoss@journal | Sunday, August 01, 2010

The wife was on a roll this morning, pointing out some interesting facts about the immense Clinton wedding that took place this weekend.

Cue the wife:

“This damn wedding cost between $2 million and $5 million. They hold this wedding at the Astor Estate, with its porcelain bath fixtures, paying millions of dollars, and claim to be for the little people?”

Me? I am for the Los Angeles Dodgers. That’s why I run around in circles in the hot sun all day. Otherwise, I would not be for them. I’d be, well, for myself, the stupid Dodger fan. Incidentally — sitting in the ballpark bleachers, eating hot dogs, drinking beer? Hypocritical. If you aren’t willing to be exactly like a baseball player while not being a baseball player, don’t bother.

“Here’s the spokesman (Clinton) for Haiti and he’s blowing ten grand on a cake?”

I get your drift. He should bake a cake out of broken hearts and plaster dust. He should bake a cake from the remains of the Haitian dead. He should bake a cake out of tragedy and misery and sorrow and loss. Then he’d be both a good spokesman and a good father. Also, a legend of Santeria. I bet it would be fun to watch the many zombified guests lurch side to side while the band play ‘Wooly Bully’ to sorrowful moans. Meanwhile, the Groom’s party wait patiently in line to kiss the Bride’s hypothalamus. Yes, President Bubba’s Nuptial Bone-In Voodoo Pastry will do that to a crowd.

“And all of the liberals defending this extravaganza claim it stimulates the economy. Can you believe that? These are the same geniuses who tell us that trickle-down economics doesn’t work!”

Surely, Doug Ross’ wife is no economist. Right? Shirley?

When rich people spend money, it proves supply-side thinking. Do the rich spend? Have they always spent? Yes. Game over.

What happens when the poor spend money? Yuck, who cares? I will point out a funny thing, though: the Clintons threw this giant wedding bash . . on the same day those crazy kids got married! What are the odds? It’s as if the marriage ceremony begged for a big party! Pshaw, I’m sure the Clintons just did it because they were tired of stepping over all the money bags laying around.

Of course, they could have done the right thing by Doug’s wife and spent nothing on the wedding, but that would have driven a stake into the heart of supply-side economics. This Clinton Wedding/Macro-Economic Macarena looms larger by the second.

“Apparently Chelsea wanted a quiet little wedding. She’s very publicity-shy. So why didn’t they tone it down and donate the money to Haitian relief? But, no, they had to hold an over-the-top, massive celebration when the American economy is suffering.”

The public have been fascinated with Chelsea for 18 years, but have you seen the Clintons welcome any publicity about their daughter? No. Does a 400 guest wedding qualify as an ‘over-the-top, massive celebration’? No. Shirley reads the tabloids, that’s her own silly fault.

Similarly far-sightedly, she thinks that if you’re truly sympathetic to someone, then you must become the same as them. I mean, c’mon — how else could you possibly know or care at all about them? You have to be like them, think like them, act like them, and keep them uppermost in your mind. Forever. “If it’s so special, being a poor schlub, then I’m sure you’ll be happy to be one for the rest of your life.”

Well, wouldn’t that simplistic rule make everything suck? Hell YEAH. That’s why Republican simpletons are the ‘Fuck You’ people in America. They’re deathly afraid of becoming the next guy: the poor, average, normal, ugly, boring nobody. They’re terrified of ending up like that. That’s why they don’t even want to think of putting themselves in another man’s shoes — WHAT IF I GET STUCK THERE? AAUUGH!

So they identify thoroughly with the privileged and powerful — THOSE are the folks they want to become. Those are the people they wouldn’t mind morphing into. But until that reward, they’ll keep on beating back the risks by hating their regular-old fellow men. That’s also why, in right-wing-land, nothing’s more gloriously American than clawing away from terrifying normalcy and toward singular success. Tell the homeless to take notes if they want something to eat. That’s the essential recipe for Republicanism.

“There really are two Americas: the Democrat ruling class and everyone else. These people are such f***ing hypocrites it makes me sick to my stomach.”

With a pinch of envy.

Illegal Immigration Proponents Support Slavery
Posted by Lori Ziganto
Wednesday, May 12th at 5:15PM EDT

Illegal immigration is another area where the true racist and misogynistic tendencies of Liberals/Leftists appear.

Hello! I heard my name — what’s up? OH, another RedState whackjob. *sigh*

Racism and misogyny, yup, that’s us. Can I go now?

. . they are currently more concerned with demonizing the state of Arizona and it’s new illegal immigration law than they are concerned with protecting the rights of citizens. They’ve also proven that they care not one whit about the people coming here illegally. They aren’t human beings to them; they are merely political pawns and cheap labor.

They’re not even pawns, they’re lumps of coal. I collect and burn them for Winter heat. Okay, that’s us — now can I bail?

. . What isn’t mentioned ever? Concern for The Children ™ who are suffering due to strained medical and educational resources.

Wow, you really are A Strange One.™ Yes, we’re The Haters Of The Children.™ I’m off now, I have to go strangle some . .

Apparently, having their lawns manicured and their tables bussed cheaply means more to the left than the human beings providing such services. Why have legal immigrants when you can have illegal ones as figurative slaves, huh, left? Nor do they show concern For the Women, who are brought here, smuggled in illegally, as slaves.

. . yes, and I enjoy killing them all, the immigrants, The Lumps™, the slaves, the little girls in their pink jumpers, fingers all sticky from candy. Kill, kill, kill. I’m Murder, Inc.™ We’re done?

. . the left doesn’t care. What’s a little enslavement and forced prostitution if it gets us some cheap labor and more bodies at the ballot box?

Non-citizens can totally vote in America. Sorry: AMERICA!™ The pawns and the slaves and The Dead Children™ vote by the billions all the time every day. If they move or breathe or eat a taco, it’s a vote.

And this is what we do: we round up all their votes, and we hate on them and enslave them and prostitute them and murder them and burn them for heat. And you know what? *BOING* The votes themselves suddenly start voting. For us. That’s how it works! I’m tired of this — end of this post, please . .

I also believe in human dignity and the sanctity of life. As such, unlike the left, I recognize illegal immigration for what it is:

The new slavery.

The new Holocaust, and we’re Adolf Hitler. Go on, say it.

Biden’s Botox Infects Obama
by Jason Mattera
05/11/2010

Now friends, it’s bad enough that the vice president of the United States has a forehead that you can break a brick over, but now Biden’s Botox is contaminating Obama’s drinking water.

How else do you explain our Dear Leader’s insistence that Elena Kagan holds enough experience to be our next Supreme Court justice?

Yes, yes, the brother is a liar, after all.

OOOOH YEAH, Bro-Ham Jason. Lay it on us. Preach, cracker-pot.

But still, the arguments the Obama Administration has ginned up in support of Kagan are mind-bogglingly pathetic.

So just for you, I’ve waded through the stories and found the Top 3 dumbest defenses of Elena Kagan.

OKAY, wingnut — let’s see it.

1. Courtesy of Politico, “[Kagan] is ambitious, restless, intellectually acute and even shares the president’s love of a good, grinding pick-up basketball game.”

Say what? She enjoys a “grinding pick-up basketball game”? Well now, that settles it then. Bust out the basketball trunks, throw on a jersey, and move yourself straight to the front of the line for a lifetime position on the most powerful court in the land!

Mattera seizes upon Politico’s dropping a detail like ‘playing basketball’ as a defense of the nominee. Mentioning she might be a centrist would be akin to building a phalanx of rickety atomic bombs around her. Saying Kagan is a nice person would be pretty much shooting Jason in the face with a bazooka. Perhaps reading a humanizing bit about the woman is too much to take for the screaming ‘You’re all Joseph Mengele!’ types? Politico, of course, is the liberal media.

What could go wrong? As an aside, can you even imagine Kagan “grinding” on the court? Ugh, I just think I lost my appetite.

Where would you peg the maturity of Mattera’s intellect? Pick a grade. No, pick a school, then a grade. It’s pre-college. I’m going with middle high school, about junior year. Alternatively, Antonin Scalia’s “grinding” would be incisive, brilliant and Federalist beyond reproach. Actually, that little jibe back at The Editor is surely lost on him: why would he try that particular smack with a male nominee? We are so stupid.

2. From the mouth of Barack, a Kagan court would be “more reflective of us as a people than ever before.” And if by “reflective,” the president means that most Americans go from Princeton to Oxford to Harvard to the University of Chicago…

. . okay, fine. She didn’t go to Roger Williams University. The Seventh Best Baccalaureate College in the U.S. (sub-region: ‘North’). Behind Cooper Union, the United States Coast Guard Academy, the United States Merchant Marine Academy, Elizabethtown College, Messiah College and Elmira College. How tragic for the country.

3. “Elena is the granddaughter of immigrants,” Obama touted of his pick, which is to say that Kagan’s parents’ parents immigrated to this country. And that makes her special how?

Awwww, Fail. That makes her like us, which is what the President pointed out. ‘We’ are almost all descended from immigrants (excusing our Indian friends, as they would have to go back a few thousand years), and more than half of ‘us’ are women. I don’t think the President’s speech was so hard to understand, really.

Now that we have those gems out of the way, enjoy the rest of your afternoon thinking about Elena Kagan in her booty basketball shorts, “grinding” on the court

Naw, let’s think about Sarah Palin instead. There’s a ‘nominee’ the 17-year-old Mattera could fantasize about, which is the whole point of politics.

Ten Dumbest Defenses of Elena Kagan

by  Jason Mattera

05/13/2010

Hmm, no linkee. Perhaps we are to deconstruct ‘here’ and divine for ourselves the ‘Ten Dumbest Defenses of Elena Kagan’? Give us a break, Mr. Egghead Editor, we just ain’t that smart.

Friday, May 07, 2010

Death’s Progress
by Dr. Paul Kengor

. . Here’s the essence of the problem with contemporary progressives and their movement, which is a gigantic problem for America: One of the only things we really know about progressives, and that they know about themselves and their ideology, is that they favor constant “change,” “reform,” an ever-shifting, ongoing “evolution,” or, yes, progression. And therein is an inherent, significant difficulty: progressivism offers no clear, definable end.

You right-wingers were furious over the pull-out of Iraq because the “definable end” was . . . ? What? Hullo?

Blacks get their civil rights. BONG. *end* Latinos, Indians, GAYS get their civil rights. BONG. *end* America pulls out of Iraq. BONG. *end*

The goal-post is always moving, forever pushed further away. Ends are never ends; they always “progress,” with culture and society, banking on the ludicrous assumption that the changes are always (or largely) good.

Stupid. BONG. *end*

Harsh words for the President:

Can’t really argue with that assessment, but it’s pretty much to be expected in a war with terrorists. If it’s the Pakistani Taliban we’re talking about, terrorist exporters and violent local thugs, some and maybe much of the action is justified. But the collateral damage is appalling, granted. Who’s the lefty critic?

Would you believe Bryan Fischer, the ultra-right-wing lunatic? A guy who advocated imprisoning homosexuals?

He started out the post by running his mouth on the new meme: Obama inflamed the ‘liberal’ Pakistani by bashing Bush. Laughably, he extended the inflammation to include Obama’s drone strikes, the real reason, but did so in the guise of “you caused the bombing you bastard” gambit. By doing so, Fischer is painting the Taliban killings as reckless politics as opposed to military actions. It’s a stupefying stance from a guy so right-wing as to be ephemeral. I’d have loved to see him drill George W. Bush for such callow politicking: killing the Taliban.

Bryan is a newborn babe. He’s never seen anything so mystifying a group of behaviors as this ‘War.’

TESTICLES! CRISES! BLOG POSTS! ATLAS! SHRUGS!

NUTS BRANDISH CAN’T EVEN GET HIS FACTS STRAIGHT. IDIOT. HA! PTEW! PBBBBBBT! YOU HEAR THAT MISTUH SHIZZLEDENT? MIGHT I BEG YOU TO TAKE OFF YOUR FLOPPY PURPLE FELT CAP AND BOA, BRO-ACK O-PIMP-AH? SO THAT YOOUUU CAAAANN HEEEAAR MEEEEEEEE?

THEY DIDN’T COME ALONG AT ONCE YOU JERK.
THEY CAME ALONG AT LAST YOU DORK.

WHAT IS YOUR OBJECTIVE TO BE PETTY EGOTISTICAL AND SMALL? OR IS THAT YOUR OBJECTIVE TO BE PETTY EGOTISTICAL AND SMALL? WHERE THE FUCK IS THE COLON SEMI-COLON BUTTON IS IT OVER HERE? WOULD I USE IT IF I COULD FIND IT@ I’D LIKE TO THINK SO?

AND BY CRISIS I MEAN SAYING ‘TEABAGGER.’ IT’S NOW, LIKE, THE GREAT TEAPRESSION OR WORLD WAR TWOBAGGER OR NUCLEAR TEABAGEDDON. IT’S LIKE JESUS BEING TEABAGGED TO THE CROSS BY TEABAG PEOPLE AND THEN TEA SAYS FATHER FORBAG THEM FOR THEY OKAY THAT’S ENOUGH.

I’M SO FUCKING ANGRY I CAN’T EVEN TYPE IT.

OKAY I’M BEGINNING TO LOSE IT HERE.

HE’S BLACK% WHAT DID YOU EXPECT?

HE’LL KILL US ALL.

Friday, April 30, 2010

Nothing Much
by Rich Galen

. . Last item: According to RealClearPolitics, of the seven polls taken over the past 10 days, six have President Obama’s approval rating under 50 percent.

We are a nation adrift. We are rudderless.

(A) When’s the next flight to the Bahamas, and (B) will my iPad work from there?

HA. Let’s see here, Real Clear Politics . .

Now THOSE are some abysmal numbers. How did Rich feel back then?

Not quite.

This post below is a good example of one of the newest tactics in political smearing.

It’s a young cousin to the Rove-ian tactic of tagging your opponent with the opposite of how he (or she) could be perceived. If he says he’s a reformer, scream that he’s corrupt. If he says he’s an outsider, call him a sleazy crony. Don’t bother with much of anything like facts, they just get in the way. If he says he’s a dog, get the whole Republican Convention to ‘meow’ whenever someone mentions his name. That’s how John Kerry, wounded Vietnam veteran, became a draft-dodging sissypants in the eyes of the right wing.

The new tactic is even more ridiculous and unfounded than the last. It goes like this: when your opponent shows interest in an issue, take every negative view and connotation within arm’s length and throw it at him. If he wants to do good things for children, he’s a nanny-stater, a government bully, a socialist, a zealot, immature, dangerous, anti-family and a child molester. Never mind that those charges are mutually exclusive in myriad ways, it’s all true.

This tactic is particularly attractive to the party of ‘NO.’ Since you don’t really take an actual side to anything because you don’t actually respect the government or want it to help Americans, there’s little hypocrisy in throwing the bad stuff on opposing sides of an issue at anybody you hate.

To wit, this post on Obama’s push for financial regulation:

Friday, April 30, 2010

The Corrupt Party, the Stupid Party, and the Birth of Crony Fascism
by Scott Wheeler

. . For more than a week now, we’ve been advising Republican Senators that they must demand a special prosecutor investigate the already documented connection between President Obama, Wall Street Financiers and the Congressional Democrats who have been loudly posturing that they are going after “big business.”

Corruption! The Democrats have been assaulting the public trust.

A brief perusal of FEC filings shows that Obama has been the recipient of nearly a million dollars from Goldman Sachs – Obama’s largest corporate contributor, the very entity under investigation by his own SEC, the same folks dragged to the Hill in televised humiliation this week — AND that the majority of Wall Street dough lands in Democrat campaign accounts. Pretty shocking revelations, there for all to witness, and yet, silence from Republicans.

Cronyism! The Democrats are doing the bidding of the criminal financiers. Like Goldman Sachs, who apparently asked to be investigated and perhaps slapped with criminal indictments.

Democrats have been publicly assaulting the free enterprise system for years.

They’re anti-business! That’s why they always pocket “the majority of Wall Street dough.” And why Goldman wants to live in their jails.

And now, finally, they have the votes, the political coverage and the compliant press required for them to fashion legislation that assumes control of certain businesses, allowing them to pick and choose who succeeds based solely on their record of donations to Democrats.

That’s how Democrats managed “to pick and choose” corporate donor numero uno, Goldman Sachs, for a giant investigation. The Wall Street behemoth now “succeeds” to be shamed, humiliated and perhaps imprisoned.

It’s a modern-day spoils system, designed by shameless and hypocritical legislators, and guaranteed the approval of America’s first socialist president. [. . em. in orig. --ed.]

Yes, that damned anti-business crony-capitalist system-gaming pro-business Socialistic corrupted reformer. Also known as . . what?!?

Can you at all see where there’s discussion of a particular view of financial regulation in here? There’s none, and that’s the point. The party of ‘NO’ can’t make or win discussions because they essentially sport a nihilism familiar to slaves. They’re owned by a corporate-ocracy in this case. Whatever the corporations want, that’s what Republicans want, so they don’t want financial reforms, but they haven’t any reasons why. So you get this hysterical guilt-by-all-associations attack Wheeler trots out for us, here.

Wednesday, April 28, 2010

The Return of ‘Social Utility’
by Tony Blankley

. . I pointed out that creating a venue to which community banks could sell their mortgages freed up their capital to make more home loans, thus creating more homeowners. That is why Franklin D. Roosevelt set up Fannie Mae in 1938. Secondary markets tend to enlarge the primary market. This is good.

Short-selling, which is now being attacked as immoral, can be well defended in the words of Dean Baker, writing at the American Prospect: “Short-selling can play a very important role in the market. If informed investors recognize that a stock is overvalued, they perform a valuable service by selling it short and pushing down its stock price.”

Unless a heretofore bedrock transaction, like a house mortgage, ends up mysteriously ‘marketized’ without the original participant having any clue. And then it gets sold short by the people who once held the note, ‘incentivizing’ the misery of the participant . .

George W. Bush ran up far, far bigger deficits than any of the 42 previous presidents, but that didn’t seem to bother many Conservatives. “Why should that be any big deal?” they seemed to be saying. Since that stuff is supposed to be a whopping violation of your espoused beliefs, I’m guessing? The 8 years of Bush administration policies created ever-eye-poppingly larger debts, culminating in a projected 1.2 trillion dollar deficit for 2009.

But now that the new(er) President has wisely decided to use the power of the government to ease the pain of the Republican Recession and to bring some reform to the broken healthcare system, government debts are causing Americans to consider armed revolution or secession from The Union. It’s even inspired a popular political movement: the Tea Party.

Why the sudden political firestorm over ‘reckless’ spending? It’s not like the Iraq War wasn’t around from 2003 on, costing us more than 10 billion dollars every month – and, for what? For Americans to die in faraway places? What a great return for your tax dollars.

Jonah Goldberg has got it all figured out, as usual. It’s not that Conservatives have no actual principles, and that whatever values they say they hold dear are nothing more than weapons of convenience in a war for political power. And it’s not that Conservatives believe the un-American Democrats have no rightful claim to the political power they duly win in elections, that’s not it. And it’s not that right-wingers are angry at and wholly uncomfortable with a black person at the top of the heap, that’s not it, either.

What it is, is this: Conservatives are just now speaking out about President Bush.

April 21, 2010 12:00 A.M.

Jonah Goldberg
A Delayed Bush Backlash
Conservatives don’t want to be fooled again.

. . One of the more widespread anti-tea-party arguments goes like this: Republicans didn’t protest very much when Bush ran up deficits and expanded government, so when Obama does the same thing (albeit on a far grander scale), Republican complaints can’t be sincere.

This lazy sophistry opens the door to liberals’ preferred argument: racism. “No student of American history,” writes Paul Butler in the New York Times, “would be surprised to learn that when the United States elects its first non-white president, a strong anti-government movement rises up.”

Butler, a law professor and author of the no-doubt-seminal Let’s Get Free: A Hip-Hop Theory of Justice, speaks for many in the media when he insinuates that nearly unprecedented stimulus spending combined with government takeovers of the health-care, banking, and automotive industries are dwarfed in importance by Obama’s skin color.

I speak for many who have actually spoken to tea partiers when I say that is slanderous hogwash.

Amount of time available for Conservatives to wake up and put a stop to the overspending disaster under Bush: 8 years. But they never did do it. Amount of time it took for them ‘realize their mistake’ and ‘vow never to let it happen again’ once a Democrat was in charge? What, weeks? Hours?

The truth is Conservatives don’t actually hold any of their precious values sacred, those are only used for political gain. Otherwise, this rebellion over the government’s being out of control would have started when the government began to get out of control, under the Bush administration, when idiotic tax cuts and the brutal War in Iraq hit the TNT of growing deficits like a series of atomic bombs.

If Goldberg’s ridiculous argument isn’t already laughable, witness Jonah himself try the patriotic ‘waking up’ to the wayward Bush administration, but this time with a difference: while the Republican was in power and vulnerable to criticism. With respect to the Iraq War, was it a mistake? He says he has come to his senses in this 2006 post, but it’s all really actually perfectly fine, there’s no sense in getting all overworked into a pro-war/anti-war thing, sheesh:

Just think if Obama had started and essentially owned the War, the way the Republican Bush had. In that case, Jonah himself might patriotically speak of secession, Tea Party style.

Friday, April 16, 2010

Barack Obama: Enemy Within
by Matt Barber

“[W]e will achieve our destiny to be as a shining city on a hill for all mankind to see.” – Ronald Wilson Reagan

“Our nation is chosen by God and commissioned by history to be a model to the world.” – George Walker Bush

“America does not presume to know what is best for everyone.” – Barack Hussein Obama (Insert deflating balloon effect here.)

We have a president loath to acknowledge American exceptionalism.

Exceptional Matt Barber

Indeed, the weight of the evidence suggests that our chief executive, through both word and deed and with malice aforethought, seeks to undermine – if not dismantle – that exceptionalism. At one time we properly called such activity anti-American, seditious or even – under certain circumstances – treasonous. Today we call it “progressive.”

*RING*

“Hello?”

“Morocco?”

“Yeah, that’s us.”

“It’s time for you to build air-conditioned catwalks across the desert.”

“HA, right.”

“This is . . Barack Obama.”

“WHOA! American Exceptionalism.”

” . . exactly.”

“Anything else?”