Posts Tagged ‘republicans’
Not just your garden variety Hollywood star who conforms to the norm by being a typical, angry, Republican-hating Democrat, Eva Longoria is a person who was given a primetime speaking role at the Democrat National Convention and is also co-chair of the Obama campaign.
So how does one of Hollywood’s “beautiful people” expose themselves as the ugly hater they are (and not very bright when it comes to damage control?)
You do it in five easy steps:
Step One. Show your true colors by retweeting a vulgar, bigoted and hateful tweet such as this:
Step Two. When the uproar begins and you start to feel the heat, delete the retweet.
Whoops! Enough people have already seen it to where the “delete it and hope it goes away” strategy fails and the story grows even bigger.
Step Three. Claim your account got hacked or blame it on something like “twitter bugging out.”
Is anyone else’s twitter bugging out? There are things in my timeline I didn’t retweet today. Hmmm? Standby trying to fix!
— Eva Longoria (@EvaLongoria) October 18, 2012
I did not write that, fact check! RT @gennerd: Courage: @evalongoria, tweets (then deletes) women and minorities … tmi.me/ydKus
— Eva Longoria (@EvaLongoria) October 18, 2012
Don’t worry, as ridiculus as this claim is, you’ll have plenty of supporters so enchanted with your pop culture awesomeness, they’ll actually buy into your lame defense:
I think so! RT @ditaobama: @evalongoria Maybe you were hacked. Change your password!
— Eva Longoria (@EvaLongoria) October 18, 2012
Of course, most of the rest of the people following Eva’s Twitter meltdown called it for what it is:
So Eva Longoria is going with the Anthony Weiner defense. Good luck with that.
— Samuel (@SARosado) October 18, 2012
Come on Eva, don’t you know enough of your American history (Nixon, Clinton, Anthony Weiner, etc.) that it’s never the crime, it’s always the cover-up?
Step Four. When the Anthony Weiner defense fails and no one believes your account got hacked, claim the words didn’t reflect your own views and you just retweeted it “for the purpose of discussion and dialogue.” LOL.
I retweet many people I don’t agree with for the purpose of discussion and dialogue, that’s democracy…and boy did this create dialogue!
— Eva Longoria (@EvaLongoria) October 18, 2012
Step Five. After steps two, three and four only make matters worse, issue apology, but to in order to fully make an ass of yourself, make sure it’s a half-assed apology and claim that the words weren’t your own personal view, even though they’re right in line with your political mindset and just about everything you tweet.
“I use Twitter as a platform for all Americans and their opinions. Sorry if people were offended by retweet,” she wrote. “Obviously not my words or my personal view. I respect all Americans #FreedomOfSpeech.”
Source: Fox News
If you’re trying to make an ass of yourself on Twitter in five steps, it’s that fifth step that really seals the deal – after deleting the tweet, then claiming your account got hacked, show yourself as a stereotypical liberal who doesn’t believe in self-accountability by saying the retweet didn’t reflect your own personal view and wave the freedom of speech flag.
As bad as the original retweet was, it was the scatterbrained and bumbling attempt at damage control that really got Eva Longoria.
And in case you think this is much ado about nothing, witness Alan Colmes, one of Obama’s most devoted supporters, going on television to call for Eva Longoria to step down as co-chair of Obama for America.
I think she should resign from the campaign or be asked to resign as co-chair because I don’t think it reflects well on the campaign. – Alan Colmes
With the Obama State Media working in overdrive to attack Romney’s pick of Rep. Paul Ryan for vice president, yesterday we were treated to examples from the propaganda machine outlets such as NBC’s Brian Williams taking great delight in mentioning the hecklers Ryan encountered at the Iowa State Fair yesterday, apparently oblivious to the fact that taking the “soapbox” at the Iowa State Fair is a famously bare-knuckled political tradition, with heckling all a part of it.
So how did the veeps from both parties fair in their campaigning today?
Four days after being tapped as Mitt Romney’s running mate, Congressman Paul Ryan rallied around 2,000 supporters inside a packed gymnasium at Lakewood High School Tuesday morning.
source: KDVR Denver
Moving on to Joe Biden, we can trust ABC-NBC-CBS-PBS-NPR-CNN-MSNBC not to report that Biden didn’t even know what state he was in today, so let’s just move right along and see what kind of crowd he drew in whatever state he was in (you were in Virginia, Joe, not North Carolina.)
Biden only managed to draw 800, but thankfully, no comparisons of crowd size will be mentioned. One thing the OSM will not be able to avoid reporting, however, is Joe Biden making maybe the most psychotic bit of hyperbole yet in the campaign.
“Romney wants to, he said in the first 100 days, he’s gonna let the big banks again write their own rules,” Biden said of the GOP nominee’s proposals to roll back the Obama administration’s financial reforms. “‘Unchain Wall Street!’”
Lowering his voice, Biden added, “They’re going to put you all back in chains.”
It seems Biden is trying to reach the levels of mindless rage achieved during the mandatory Two Minutes Hate hurled against Goldstein in Orwell’s 1984.
A little history lesson for you Joe, wasn’t it your Democrat party who fought to keep slavery, created the Ku Klux Klan to wage a campaign of terror to bring it back, and despite the media’s attempts to convince many in America that the Civil Rights Act was a single-handed effort of the Democrats, wasn’t it your Democrat party which only gave the Civil Rights Act 60% support to the Republican’s 80%?
Lowering his voice, Biden added, “They’re going to put you all back in chains.”
You’re either becoming progressively more unhinged than the simple gaffe machine we’ve always known you to be, or you’re slipping into deeper stages of dementia, maybe a combination of both. Either way, keep up the good work, Joe. Just eighty-three more days of this and you can look forward to some much needed rest when R & R take over in January.
Remember when the media went ballistic in 2009 over the idea of Americans actually taking to the streets, giving voice to their beliefs and protesting policies they didn’t like?
It was called the Tea Party movement, and these Tea Partiers (or “teabaggers” as many in the media liked to call them) were branded by the media as “hateful.”
Remember how the non-existent mayhem of those “angry” Tea Party protests (which had a grand total of zero arrests) was followed in 2011 by the Occupy Movement, which the media celebrated as “populist,” “inspiring” and “possibly the greatest movement of our times?”
And remember how foolish the media looked by the time the “peaceful protests” of the Occupy Movement had managed to rack up over 4,000 arrests, among them incidents of arson, rape and murder?
I was thinking back on those two movements tonight, and it reminded me of how Janeane Garofalo chose to describe those “hateful” teabaggers in daring to question her beloved president. It always strikes me as funny when the most hateful person in the room starts going on a rant about who the real haters are. Take it away, Janeane:
Let’s be very honest about what this is about – it’s not about bashing Democrats, it’s not about taxes, they have no idea what the Boston Tea Party was about, they don’t know their history at all, this is about hating a black man in the White House. This is racism, straight up. That is nothing but a bunch of tea-banging rednecks and there is no way around that. And you know, you can tell these type of right-wingers anything and they’ll believe it, except the truth. You tell them the truth and they become, it’s like showing Frankenstein’s monster fire. They become confused and angry and highly volitile.
Now this is where the ugly rant of Ms. Garofalo turns to a level of hate that would make even a Nazi proud, because she starts spewing ideas that come straight from the most evil movement and hateful theory of the 20th century, eugenics and anthropometry. The eugenics movement was at the very core of Nazism itself, a belief in improving the species by eliminating the “inferior” races (an idea you can still find sentiments of in the Huffington Post today.) The theory of anthropometry was an important part of eugenics, an idea that by measuring a person’s forehead, the slope of that forehead, the shape and size of the nose, etc., you could actually measure a person’s intelligence.
Click here to see what anthropometry looked like.
Now check out Garofalo as she lets her anthropometric bigotry rise to a level even Josef Mengele would appreciate:
Their limbic brain, we’ve discussed this before, the limbic brain inside a right-winger or Republican or conservative or your average white power activist, the limbic brain is much larger inside their headspace, than in a reasonable person, and it’s pushing against the frontal lobe, so their synapses are misfiring … it is a neurological problem we’re dealing with.
Yes, because right-wingers and Republicans and conservatives and white power activists are all one in the same and anyone who doesn’t think like you do is an evil, brain-damaged monster. (How’s that for tolerance, a love of Democracy and an honest debate?)
Ms. Garofalo’s hate speech can be seen in this video here. The person who uploaded that video, Urban Alchemist, summarized the response of Garofalo and the mindset of a whole legion of Obama supporters perfectly:
When you don’t have a rational response to a legitimate criticism about economic policy… call them a racist.
Obama lovers began throwing the racist term around at anyone who dare question their dear leader, and it’s continued to this day and it will continue up until the election.
Now we don’t ever want to sink all the way down to the level of a Janeane Garofalo in her ugliness, but it is vital that we at least level the playing field. Knowing there will be a million mindless charges of racism thrown at anyone who would like to see Obama go one and done, we must try to imagine a little bit of Janeane Garofalo as a closet Republican, finally coming out:
Someone doesn’t like Romney’s plans for an economic recovery?
MORMON HATER!
Someone criticizes Romney’s calls for a return to self-reliance?
ANOTHER EXAMPLE OF INTOLERANCE TOWARDS THE MORMON GUY.
Someone thinks Romney is just the wrong choice for America?
LET’S BE VERY HONEST, THIS IS ABOUT HATING A MORMON IN THE WHITE HOUSE!
Someone argues Romney’s wrong in saying there’s too much government?
THIS IS ABOUT PREJUDICE, STRAIGHT UP!
Someone cracks a joke about how Romney cuts his hair?
ANTI-MORMON BIGOT!
See how easy that is? I know, I know, it definitely doesn’t raise the level of the debate, but it sure does feel good to take that same kind of shit they’ve been slinging at us for so many years and sling it right back at them.
When arch-conservative Ann Coulter goes all in for a moderate candidate like Mitt Romney, when conservative talk radio firebrand Michael Savage offers Newt Gingrich one-million dollars of his own money to “drop out of the presidential race for the sake of the nation,” you may wonder why so many high profile conservatives are urging the GOP to drop its front runner like a hot potato. Well, it’s no wonder really, it’s all about winning in November – they have their doubts about Gingrich and I have mine as well, so let me give you my own personal list of . . .
The Top Five Reasons Newt Would Lose to Obama:
1. Too many Independents are set against Newt Gingrich.
While there’s a bit of an enthusiasm edge on one side or the other from election to election, for the most part, American elections are split in thirds – there’s about one-third of America with its mind set to vote Democrat, about one-third with its mind set to vote Republican, and a middle-third which actually decides the election. It was the Independents who put Obama into the White House and it’s the Independents who seem poised to make him a one-term president, but when it comes to a choice of Gingrich vs. Obama, many Independents still remember the government shutdown of ’95 & ’96 and place the blame for it on Gingrich and not Clinton and many Indies see Newt as just too far right, the hardcore conservative Grinch, the Uncle Scrooge that the media painted him as, so is it any surprise when you look at the numbers?
Gingrich is 15-points underwater in approval with Independents. That’s not the fluid 15-points of a guy who’s new on the scene, either, Newt’s been around a long time, most people already have a set opinion on him and that 15-points, that’s going to be a hard 15-points for Gingrich to try to move.
2. The Obama State Media will be working overtime to vilify the GOP candidate, and Newt Gingrich gives them the biggest target.
The story that Newt demanded a divorce from his wife on her death bed is a lie, but a lie repeated so many times by the media that most people actually believe it to be true. If the MSM can get most of America to believe a lie about Gingrich, imagine what they can do with some of details of Gingrich’s life that aren’t in dispute. Adam O’Neal had a good read on why Gingrich’s personal scandals won’t carry as much weight as they might have in more prosperous times, but make no mistake about it, just look at these propaganda posters, er – I mean, magazine covers from the 90s and realize that mainstream media will have no shame in doing everything it can to demonize Newt once again and they’ll have a much easier time demonizing him than they would Romney.
3. Newt will lose those voters who vote on looks and charm.
If you’re reading this post, you’re probably a political junkie just the same as I am. Well, it may be hard for you and me to fathom, but the truth is, most Americans don’t even like politics, so when they go to vote, they could be locked into one party, or they might be capable of voting either way and even study the candidates’ positions out of a sense of civic duty, but never underestimate the amount of voters who don’t have the time to be bothered studying issues and who, whether consciously or not, cast their vote based on which candidate will look the best representing our nation. We all want someone pleasant to look at when they address the nation, but for some people, that’s really all they have to go by.
With Obama vs. Romney, the charisma factor might be a wash, but how much of a swing would it be for Obama vs. Newt? One out of twenty voters giving it up for Obama on looks alone? Just a wild guess, but I could easily see a 5-point swing for Obama here.
4. Nothing could fire up the Democrat base like the possibility of a President Gingrich . . .
Okay, maybe the prospect of a President Bachmann would inspire an equal amount of terror and determination in the hearts of Dems too, but – just visualize whatever amount of fight Democrats would have against a potential President Romney and then compare it to how they would fight against Gingrich tooth and nail, as if they were fighting against the end of civilization itself and it’s no contest, you want to inspire the despondent Democrats out of their doldrums, just nominate Newt.
5. Rich Lowry said it well enough, allow me to allow him to make the final point: “All that is predictable about Newt is that he is unpredictable, and, irresistibly, an election that should be about President Obama and his record will become about the heat and light generated by his electric performance. That’s the way it was as speaker, too. Eventually, he wore out his welcome in epic fashion.”
Newt Gingrich is a truly exceptional mind, I used to watch his college courses on TV with my eyes welling up with tears of pride over Gingrich’s stirring lectures and the way he could articulate so perfectly everything that is good about America and all that could be better about America, but as much as I love the professor and former Speaker of the House, there is only one thing Republicans should be focused on right now and that is nominating the candidate with the best chance at winning in November. Gingrich, as brilliant as he is, gives Obama way too many opportunities to make the election about the challenger instead of being a referendum on him and his dismal presidency.
So I’m catching up on the latest three opinion pieces from Paul Krugman, more variations on how the $787 billion stimulus only failed because it just wasn’t enough spending and as I reach the end of the piece with Krugman imploring Obama to grow a pair and stand up to those evil, debt-slashing Republicans, I see the following ad served up by Google:
Are they mind readers? How did Google know I've got a thing for Middle Eastern women?
Considering how Google has made a fine science out of serving up relevant ads based either on your previous searches or the content on the page you’ve landed on, I find it almost bewildering that Google would chose this ad to serve up, because I’m vacationing and on a friend’s computer, I certainly haven’t done any searches for Arabic porn (or any other kind) since I arrived here and the only thing some might consider Muslim-related content on the page is the mention of Barack Hussein Obama. Personally, I’m not sold on the “Obama’s a Muslim” theory, but for whatever reason, Google served the ad up and was right in guessing it – I’m the guy who couldn’t help but click on an ad for “Women’s Muslim Swimsuits.”
The ad takes me to another page of links, the topmost of which is called “Muslim Swimwear for Women” and I eagerly click on that and land at a site called swimoutlet.com at a page with the more generic title of “Modest Swimwear” but they still all look like Muslims to me, and what a collection of virgin beauties to behold.
This is what paradise looks like, my friends.
It leaves so much more to the imagination, doesn’t it? Way sexier than any bikini I’ve ever seen!
Now there are as many as 1.5 billion Muslims in this world, and as part of the core beliefs, most of those Muslims believe that there will be a day when Allah sees to it that the world will be completely destroyed and up from the ashes, a Muslim Caliphate will come to power and rule the entire Earth. Making allowance for some portion of those Muslims that are less than militant in their beliefs, you could imagine then that there are at least as many as one-billion people in this world who believe that this this is the dress code the Muslim Caliphate should dictate for all women when they venture out of their homes to the beach and the poolside – this is the dress code that should be imposed over the entire world.
That might sound frightening to some, but I also have to admit, there’s something highly alluring about the style. It makes me think of Forrest Gump’s quote about a box of chocolates, or how wonderful it is to be a child unwrapping a Christmas present and all the excitement that goes with having no idea what’s inside that box! (I doubt that very many Muslims will appreciate the analogy, however.)
I’m so tired of seeing all the scantily clad women at the beach leaving almost nothing to the imagination. You know what? I’m going to say it right now – I’m ready. Bring on the Global Caliphate. There’s nothing hotter than covered women at the poolside.