Operation Yellow Elephant
Search Site
Our Sponsor
Reviews of This Blog
"It's ridiculous to compare you to a douche bag; douche bags serve a purpose."
"Pollutes most of what it touches"
"A blog you should be reading for up-to-the-minute news on wingnuts"
"Very funny"
"Shrill"
Online Store
Click here to enter store.
Media Links
Blogroll
100 Monkeys Typing
A Chicken Is Not A Pillage
A Lie A Day
The American Street
Bark Bark Woof Woof
Cloyce's Coffee Klatsch
Correntewire
Dependable Renegade
Elementropy
Jon Swift
Princess Sparkle Pony
The Republic of Dogs
Sadly, No!
Why Now?
World O'Crap
Wingnut Wide Web
Internment Spa Lady
Fat Andy in P-Town
Clown Hall
America's Worst Law Student™
Gipper's Nippers
Freepers Creepers
Feeds
Credits
Site Statistics
Archive for July 2007
Rich Little Poor Kids
Posted by Clif on 07/31/07 at 9:03 pm
Category: Alicia Colon
It’s been a while since we’ve checked in on Staten Island’s very own Alicia Colon for her own unique brew of wingnut punditry, and we’re happy to say that Alicia is still in fine form:
As the premature and increasingly surreal and ridiculous presidential debates continue, we can expect to hear more about the growing gap between rich and poor Americans. The Democrats plan to focus their campaigns on the needs of whom [sic] they perceive to be the poor, but in New York City it’s harder to label an individual’s economic status based on the usual liberal stereotypes: Those who work in the service industry here are likely to be earning the same salary as those holding loftier job positions.
Silly liberals who insist perpetrating the stereotype that CEOs are rich and janitors are poor. Who do they think they’re fooling?
Rather than relying on liberal statistics and surveys, Alicia relies on indisputable evidence — namely, stuff she’s heard from her husband who works in a hotel — to prove that service workers earn more than company execs:
Here in New York City, service jobs are a career choice, not — as in other cities, where college students and single parents fill these positions — merely a stepping stone to a better job. My husband works in a major Midtown hotel where banquet waiters and waitresses can command six-figure salaries and where the bell staff includes landlords who drive BMWs and Lexuses.
So next time you think about tipping the bell boy, you should really ask him to tip you for giving him the opportunity to earn his lucrative salary, send his kids to Groton and own all those condos in St. Barts.
According to Alicia, those silly Democrats are using the completely discredited argument that poor people are poor to fuck up the income tax system:
The three leading contenders for the Democratic presidential nomination are promising that they will repeal or let the tax cuts for wealthier voters expire. One even proposed additional tax hikes on capital gains, hedge funds, and corporations to help pay for new tax breaks for lower-income families. Talk about clueless.
Clueless, because it will be taking money away from CEOs who can scarcely afford to pay for their daily lattes and give it to waitresses who will just use it to buy $6,000 shower curtains and yet another case of Dom Perignon.
Unsafe Showering
Posted by Clif on 07/30/07 at 10:08 pm Category: Wingnuts
Valerie Huber, who is the Executive Director of the National Abstinence Education Association, aka Condoms Я’nt Us, spoke out today about the rampant practice of co-educational showering:
A recent Health and Human Services study found that “comprehensive” programs exaggerate the effectiveness of condoms and encourage a false sense of protection. Further, the study noted that one popular program promoted graphic sexual behavior such as showering together as an acceptable “abstinent” activity.
Notwithstanding the quotation marks, the program didn’t call showering together “abstinent” or “acceptable” but said it was a “green light,” i.e. no risk, activity which, last time I checked, was perfectly accurate, unless you are talking about the risk of smelling like cheap soap. Of course, what Huber is really up to is to move the abstinence goal post to require chaperoned dating, burqa-length dresses, and sex education that tells boys that monkey-spanking causes blindness and insanity.
Still Crazy (After All These Years)
Posted by Clif on 07/30/07 at 12:48 am Category: Wingnuts, Town Hall Watch
Ever since his daddy died, Michael Reagan hasn’t been quite right, although some say that his problems started when one of the horses on the Reagan ranch kicked him in the head. If you don’t believe me, take a look at Reagan’s latest offering at Clown Hall:
Among the Democrats, the culture of American politics has succumbed to the culture of the coke-snorting, booze-soaked Hollywood of Paris Hilton and Lindsay Lohan and the rest of Tinseltown’s decadent and far-Left celebrities.
And what exactly have the Democrats done to warrant this condemnation? Did somebody catch Obama driving drunk on a suspended license or Hillary doing a line of coke in Iowa? Uh no. They answered questions posed by a sock puppet/snowman and other YouTube users:
The current lack of restraint was on display the other night when CNN … turned the question-asking function of the debate moderator over to a weird conglomeration of clownish inquisitors via YouTube.Com. Instead of walking off the stage…, the candidates went along with this sham of a debate, dutifully playing the role of straight men to a cast recruited from Looney Tunes.
Like the cancer victim who removed her wig when asking a health care question. Yep. Another clownish inquisitor right out of Looney Tunes.
Which brings Reagan back to Lindsey and Paris, who, apparently, can’t be mentioned enough:
On display was the culture of Hollywood – the culture of Paris Hilton and Lindsay Lohan, the Hollywood that marches in lockstep with the militant Marxists who dominate the Democrat party today.
Am I the only one who started giggling at the idea of Paris Hilton and Lindsey Lohan marching in lockstep with militant Marxists? Neither one of them has had a political thought in their lives. Or did I miss the part in Das Kapital where Marx said that all people should be permitted to party according to their abilities?
Afraid that you may not have gotten his point that it’s all about Lindsey and Paris, Reagan humps that tired pony again:
I am surprised that they didn’t include among the questioners Miss Hilton or Miss Lohan
Silly Reagan, of course, CNN wouldn’t include them among the questioners. Lohan would have asked the candidates what they planned to do about the alienation of workers from the product of their labor, thus revealing the secret Marxist conspiracy between he Democratic party and CNN. And then Paris would have asked each candidate for an example of false class consciousness by the proletariat and the whole game would be over.
Pinko Commie Progressives
Posted by Clif on 07/28/07 at 2:18 pm Category: Wingnuts, America's Shittiest Website
The right wing has spent considerable effort trying to turn the word “liberal” into an epithet equivalent to, say, scum-sucking Commie homo or greasy butt-munch. Not surprisingly, those on the left have increasingly sought to call themselves something else, such as Hillary Clinton did during the YouTube debate when she referred to herself as a “progressive.” And also not surprisingly the wingnuts have started a campaign to demonize that term too, starting with this post by the preposterous Yuval Levin over at America’s Shittiest Website™:
Progressivism, after all, has a very mixed history in American politics, which takes in not only efforts to reform labor laws, bust trusts, and create national parks but also some serious doses of racism, social Darwinism, eugenics, and a very strange mix of authoritarianism and out of control populism
Of course, there is no broad agreement about the meaning of Progressivism, nor is their any manifesto that defines the tenets of Progressivism. At best it is an umbrella term that covers a number of disparate reform movements in the early twentieth century.
So Levin can attribute almost any belief he’d like to Progressivism, although racism certainly seems a stretch. But Levin apparently fails to see the irony of his hurling a charge of racism from a website run under the auspices of a publication that itself was once a virulent proponent of segregationism, which it espoused in blatantly racist terms. Consider this defense of segregationism from the pages of the National Review:
The central question that emerges . . . is whether the White community in the South is entitled to take such measures as are necessary to prevail, politically and culturally, in areas in which it does not prevail numerically? The sobering answer is Yes — the White community is so entitled because, for the time being, it is the advanced race.
You can read more about racism, er, Progressivism at the National Review here.
Burr up Her Butt
Posted by Clif on 07/24/07 at 8:54 pm Category: Wingnuts, Ridiculous Republicans
Michelle Bachmann, Minnesota’s very own version of Katherine Harris, recently explained her conversion from a Democrat to a wingnut Republican:
Bachmann remembers exactly what she was wearing when she decided that she no longer was a Democrat: “A tan trenchcoat, blue pin-striped shirt, like a tailored shirt, and dress slacks,” she said. “It was a vivid memory for me because it was a turning point philosophically.”
She was a college senior, sitting on the hard seat of an Amtrak train, headed back to Winona State College. She and her boyfriend, Marcus Bachmann, had worked together on Jimmy Carter’s campaign, even attended the inaugural.
Now she was killing time reading “Burr,” Gore Vidal’s sardonic historical novel about early U.S. history.
“He was kind of mocking the Founding Fathers and I just thought, ‘What a snot,’ ” she said. “I just remember reading the book, putting it in my lap, looking out the window and thinking, ‘You know what? I don’t think I am a Democrat. I must be a Republican.’ “
Because making fun of the Founding Fathers is a well-known plank of the Democratic Party. Later in the interview Bachmann confessed that after reading Uncle Tom’s Cabin she realized that she was really in favor of slavery.
Please recount in the comments other books that have resulted in a miraculous conversion in your own life.
The Name Game (cont’d)
Posted by Clif on 07/23/07 at 3:50 pm Category: Lying Republicans, Loathsome RepublicansAt the latest “Ask Mitt Anything”* forum, Mitt “Say Anything” Romney, came up with another excuse for the Osama Obama sign incident. His campaign manager had floated the risible idea that “Osama Obama” was just an “alliterative play on words” and not a comparison of Osama to Obama bin Laden. Not even Mr. Say Anything could get that one out with a straight face, so he tried another excuse:
I don’t look at all the signs when I’m having pictures taken. I have a lot of pictures taken with people,” Romney said. “I don’t really spend all that much time looking at the signs and the T-shirts and the buttons. I don’t have anything to say about a sign somebody else was holding.
Fair enough, except for this:
Mitt’s got both his mitts on that poster, so I think he can’t really say he wasn’t holding it. And you have to imagine Mitt looks at stuff he holds up for the cameras with his own hands. Else he might wind up holding this:
______
* Believe it or not, “Ask Mitt Anything” is really the name for Say Anything Mitt’s “town hall” meetings.
The Name Game
Posted by Clif on 07/22/07 at 1:37 pm Category: Lying Republicans, Loathsome Republicans
Not only will Mitt Romney say anything to get elected but he’ll do anything as well, as evidenced by his photo op with one of his illiterate supporters from South Carolina and the vile poster she scrawled. A Romney campaign spokesman tried to explain away this latest loathsomeness from Romney by saying:
The governor stopped briefly for a picture with a supporter who just happened to be holding their own sign with an alliterative play on words. I don’t think it was equating or comparing anyone.
Because it was just an alliteration and could easily have been “Obama Opama” instead. It was just an accident that it was “Obama Osama” instead, so there’s no effort to compare Obama to Osama bin Laden. None at all. Uh huh. That excuse isn’t lame, it’s paralyzed.
Well here’s another “alliterative play on words” for the Romney campaign.
This poster isn’t saying that Mitt is shitty, so Mitt would have posed for a photo-op with this poster too, right?
(Picture from TMZ.com)
Edelman Snatches Feith’s Title
Posted by Clif on 07/21/07 at 11:24 am Category: Iraq, Stupid Republicans
One thing that has yet to be mentioned about Cheney acolyte Eric Edelman’s riposte to Hillary Clinton was its tenuous grasp on recent history. Edelman said:
Premature and public discussion of the withdrawal of U.S. forces from Iraq reinforces enemy propaganda that the United States will abandon its allies in Iraq, much as we are perceived to have done in Vietnam, Lebanon and Somalia.
Somalia? What the effing-hell is Somalia doing in that list? Was Edelman buried six feet below the surface of Mars when U.S. troops were in Somalia?
Here’s a brief lesson for the history-challenged and dumber-than-cinder-block Undersecretary for Defense Policy. In 1991 Socialist President Siad Barre of Somalia was overthrown. Rival factions could not agree on a leader so Somalia was plunged into anarchy and became a battlefield among competing war lords. In December 1992, American troops entered Somalia as part of the UN forces designated as UNITAF, but UNITAF was unable to keep peace among the rival factions seeking control of the country. In August 1993 the UNITAF forces became the target of attacks from the various Somalia militias. Attacks on UNITAF forces increased after that, culminating in the Battle of Mogadishu on October 3 and 4, which resulted in a number of UNITAF casualties. Almost all U.S. forces were withdrawn by March 1994, with the remaining UN and US personnel removed in March 1995.
In the U.S. Army’s own history of the Somalian intervention, from which the summary above was drawn, this conclusion is offered:
The United States entered Somalia in December 1992 to stop the imminent starvation of hundreds of thousands of people. Although it succeeded in this mission, the chaotic political situation of that unhappy land bogged down U.S. and allied forces in what became, in effect, a poorly organized United Nations nation-building operation. In a country where the United States, perhaps naively, expected some measure of gratitude for its help, its forces received increasing hostility as they became more deeply embroiled into trying to establish a stable government. The military and diplomatic effort to bring together all the clans and political entities was doomed to failure as each sub-element continued to attempt to out-jockey the others for supreme power.
Hmm. Do you see any “allies” there that were abandoned? Or that could even be “perceived” to be abandoned. I sure as hell don’t.
When Edelman took Doug Feith’s position as Undersecretary of Defense Policy he was only supposed to take over the office space, not to take over as well Feith’s sobriquet as the “Dumbest Fucking Guy on the Planet.”
Lush Life
Posted by Clif on 07/20/07 at 8:49 am Category: St. Peggy of the Dolphins
Some Outsiders™ have wondered why this blog continually portrays Peggy Noonan as a lush. Well, look no further than her review of Bob Novak’s alleged memoir:
It’s not a big book, but it tells you … [that] Washington in the 1950s was a pretty wonderful place to be. It seems … to have been the last time Washington was fun. It was … an easier place, a more human one, in part, apparently, because everyone in the White House, on the Hill, and in the newspaper bureaus was drunk. … In the Washington young Mr. Novak enters, senators plot over whiskey and cigars; reporters knock back scotches while trading tidbits at the press-club bar; lunches with sources begin with doubles; the senate majority leader is soused in the lobby, singing to himself.
What a paradise that must seem to Peggy. To be able to get plotzed in public and sing to herself in the park without being stared at. It must be so lonely for her being locked up in her darkened study with a case of Grey Goose