I received an email from my friend Greg over at Modern Conservative (full disclosure: I contribute to that site) about how GOP headquarters in certain parts of Arizona are now getting retaliation threats for the actions of the thoroughly unconservative Jared Loughner. This got me thinking about how perilous it could be to alert the media about this because it might be turned around more quickly than Obama's Christian apathy.
(To digress for a second: Obama went to church last weekend, some were saying Hell froze over, others - not naming names, but that person rhymes with "me" - think it got a little hotter....)
So, how would the media spin this into an attack by some right-wing nutjob?
1. Take a letter put together by some left-wing crazy (running on the outside assumption they even exist).
2. Forge it to make it look like it came from the right (click to see the full size)
Note the waxy crayon buildup of the GOP logo, convincing use of scotch tape, typewriter font, and apparent attempt to cover up misspelling "letterhead".
3. Find someone dumb enough to believe it's real...
After last week we now know that list is very VERY short....right?.........Guys?
:-/Add a comment
In an unexpected twist to the Arizona shootings, a man wounded in the attack was arrested and taken for a psychiatric exam after an outburst at a town hall meeting, during which he took a picture of a tea party leader and yelled “you’re dead,” authorities say.
James Eric Fuller, 63, was detained on misdemeanor disorderly conduct and threat charges Saturday during the event taped for a special edition of ABC’s “This Week,” Pima County sheriff’s spokesman Jason Ogan said
Hopefully nobody will tell this guy shooting pictures isn't the same thing...
Clearly the man is under some kind of duress if he remained a Democrat while suddenly becoming a fan of talk radio and influenced by the rhetoric of Sarah Palin....
“It looks like Palin, Beck, Sharron Angle, and the rest got their first target.”
I know it seems like mixed signals, shouting "you're dead" to conservatives after criticizing them for teaching him the virtues of that kind of rhetoric.
That's why Sherrif Dupnik has taken in him in for psychiatric help. You can't be saying you're a liberal and then tell individuals "you're dead," it doesn't work that way. Revolution doesn't focus on the individual.
This guy is either a DINO, or a closet conservative, obviously. Only a mental exam can help figure that out. They have to make sure it's open ended and probative so they can have a chance to really see into this guy's mind. Here's how the exam (written by Sheriff Dupnik) should go:
- Who is your favorite conservative talk radio host?
- When did you "like" Sarah Palin's Facebook page?
- When did you first realize Obama wasn't a citizen?
- How violent would you get if you went to a tea party that just served tea? (On a scale of 9-10)
- Do you like, like like, or love unconditionally the "double n" in Glenn Beck
- When you take a bath do you bring in all of your talk radio action figures to play with, or just your favorites?
- Spell "PMSNBC"
- True or false: The "P" is silent
- Chris "Tingle-Tangle" Matthews, liberal bedwetter or jockeying for a lucrative deal endorsing catheters?
- True or
false: Ed Schultz is related to the great Charles Schultz because his brain is the size of a peanut.
It's a proof-fool test.Add a comment
If you want this in t-shirt form go here...do it now!Add a comment
Conservatives claim Reagan never had Alzheimer's, he just lost a little bit of memory every time he gave liberals a beating they would never forget.
Poll finds liberals more likely embrace the new zodiac sign, criticize conservatives for their "war on science."
Photos of Jared Loughner posing with a gun in a red g-string clearly solidify his credentials as a conservative according to a statement from the LGBT community.Add a comment
2011 is a big year for Ronald Reagan fans, being the centennial of his February 6 birth in Tampico, Ill. But youngest son Ron Reagan is spoiling the good cheer with a new book that suggests the Gipper suffered from Alzheimer's disease while in the White House, a claim dismissed by Reagan's doctors and outside experts....he saw hints of confusion and "an out-of-touch president" during the 1984 campaign and again in 1986, when his father couldn't recall the names of California canyons he was flying over.
zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz - wha!?! Oh good, it's done...
Even dead the media (and apparently his own son) can't let a good Ronald Reagan moment go untarnished. Is there a paternal term for the Oedipus complex that we can use to describe Ron trying to screw over his father?
What a snoozer of a story! What's the purpose of knowing whether Reagan had Alzheimer's while being president that doesn't make the left look less competent than a woman standing up to pee?
Basically, what Ron is telling the world is that his father beat communism with, to quote Rush Limbaugh, "half his brain tied behind his back."
Ron Reagan is telling the world that his father was brain damaged and liberals STILL couldn't beat him...not in debates...and obviously not at the ballot box. The only victory they could claim electorally was that they barely prevented the electoral college from voting unanimously for Reagan.
This has become a recurring pattern in modern history, the left also lost to George W. Bush, the dumbest president ever, twice. Not bad for the self-appointed smarted people in the room. You're just too good for America I guess.
I don't want to question in any way his love for his father, but I can't help but continue wondering why the hell he wants to pop a squat on his memory, and especially on the eve of his 100th birthday. It's just so weird to me.
In any case, this is one of those moments where lefties of the world should unite to keep this one to themselves. Their revelatory conduct over the Tucson tragedy was bad enough, and now they want us to know that if they ever developed Alzheimer's it would be an intellectual blessing for them?Add a comment
It's true...Google it!
There is a 13th sign that has apparently always been around but not used under western astrology. The new sign is called out...not that you wont be able to recognize it, ObamaCare is easier to read...
Capricorn: Jan. 20 - Feb. 16
Aquarius: Feb. 16 - March 11
Pisces: March 11- April 18
Aries: April 18 - May 13
Taurus: May 13 - June 21
Gemini: June 21 - July 20
Cancer: July 20 - Aug. 10
Leo: Aug. 10 - Sept. 16
Virgo: Sept. 16 - Oct. 30
Libra: Oct. 30 - Nov. 23
Scorpio: Nov. 23 - Nov. 29
Ophiuchus: Nov. 29 - Dec. 17
Sagittarius: Dec. 17 - Jan. 20
I'm not going to elaborate any further because I'm not a trained astrologist. I don't want to pontificate on these things because your astrological sign has a lot to do with your identity. Which is worrisome for me because Socrates said "know thyself," and that's a problem because my new sign is the new guy on the list. I can't even pronounce it, let alone know what it will do to my soul.
......I don't even know who I am anymore.
Another reason this stinks is if you thought Leos, for example, were douches because a certain sitting president - who shall remain nameless - was one, and you hit your knees praising God that you are a and still get to be a Cancer....after you explain to Him what a Zodiac is...following this change, do you think he'll answer your prayer to change it all back because said president is now a Cancer too?
People actually use this crap to determine their futures via horoscope and figure out their relationships with other people based on which sign they're most compatible with.
And now it's all about to change with the snap of a finger because of some sign nobody can even begin to pronounce, which is probably why they left it out in the first place.
For people who believe this stuff, this should put truth to the lie that it's totally meaningless. Not that most people needed to be told that in the first place, but a lot of people believe in its power.
Considering that astrologers are a typically liberal bunch, I wonder what they think this all means relative to they way they poop themselves over the so-called "war on science" conservatives wage against issues like global warming.
On a different note...Hey University of Arizona...what's your new sign?
Apparently it all may be a hoax...standing by...Add a comment
Liberal pundits resent notion that comparison of their Tucson analysis versus conservatives as being "apples to oranges" respectively is only accurate if one holds their tongue while saying "apples."
U of A officials express gratitude for whistles and catcalls from crowd during the Tucson memorial as welcome alternative to their malfunctioning laugh track.
PETA outraged at Palin confession that she finds it calming to drown out liberal punditry with the sound of cats in blenders.Add a comment
It's never going to end. People like Jonathan Martin at Politico will see to that...
At sunrise in the East on Wednesday, Sarah Palin demonstrated that she has little interest — or capacity — in moving beyond her brand of grievance-based politics. And at sundown in the West, Barack Obama reminded even his critics of his ability to rally disparate Americans around a message of reconciliation....
But for much of the eight-minute talk she was defensive and showed little interest in doing anything other than channeling the understandable resentment of her ideological kinsmen over the blame-casting. And that won't appeal much to a political center that — even while they may not think Palin is in any way responsible for Tucson — preferred more conciliation even before the jarring attempted assassination of a member of Congress.
Get his entire diatribe here
Sarah Palin is not the president.
Barack Obama, despite some incendiary rhetoric (by liberals standards) he has spewed over the last couple of years, has not been dragged in to any discussion about blood being on his hands, he hasn't had to endure even a hint of hypothesizing his culpability in the Tucson shooting.
It should be needless to say that their roles in politics and the circumstances surrounding them are worlds apart. Their speeches served different functions and for obvious reasons.
It should be needless to say...but it isn't for some people, maybe Politico should start instituting intelligence tests as a condition of employment.
Sorry if this harsh language causes a run on glocks and a spike in interest over where MENSA meetings are held, but left has spent the last 5 days making complete fools and hypocrites of themselves. Instead of absorbing a message to all about civility and toning down the pervasive "us versus" them attitude the nation is engulfed in, they choose to funnel it in to a message stream that is directed exclusively at conservatives.
Those willing to be intellectually honest realize that Sarah Palin actually did many of the things Obama did, but she also worked in a defense of herself and a criticism of monkeys in the media who continued to fling their poo until Obama delivered his oratorical banana....naptime should start any minute now...
Like I said yesterday, the left's zeroing in on the use of "blood libel" and pretty much nothing else illustrates how their pronouncement that her speech was a "missed opportunity" is based entirely on their say so only.
I dare anyone reading this to find a quote from Palin's speech outside of the non-issue of her "blood libel" utterance that demonstrates the "missed opportunity" liberals have been carping about.
Place it in the comments section...and explain yourself.
Man oh man, be careful what I wish for, right? I hope I have enough bandwidth for the coming onslaught. :-/Add a comment
Jewish groups denounce Palin's use of "blood libel," adding they would forgive the apparent insult if she became a Democrat.
"God Hates Fags" church cancels picket of funeral for the 9 year-old girl killed in Tucson massacre after residents offer to finally introduce them to Him.
Attempting to announce 2010 as tied for warmest year on record NOAA official is asked to speak up or take off the scarfs.Add a comment