Blog de KingShamus

"When an entire nation thirsted to break free from PC…Andrew Breitbart opened a big bar."–Chris Muir

Posts Tagged ‘Election 2012’

If Mitt Romney Wins…

Posted by KingShamus on October 24, 2012

…the Left is going to make the 2000 recount, and their subsequent 8 year tantrum, look like a breezy pillow-fight.

Why do I say this?  Because they are setting themselves up for the mother of all emotional letdowns.  Watch as featured Daily Kossack propagandist Jed Lewison spins Obama’s sinking poll numbers.

Bottom line: Yes, this is a close race. Yes, the first debate appears to have given Romney a boost, but it wasn’t a big enough boost to put him ahead in the electoral math and there’s no evidence to suggest that he continues to have any forward momentum. Even if the national popular vote were a tossup, Obama has a real edge in the states that matter. The race is by no means over, but for Romney to win, he needs to shift the electoral map in his favor. So far, he hasn’t been able to do it.

(By the way–no linkie love for Kook Fringe jag-offs.  Find it for yourself if you must.)

Meanwhile, Real Clear Politics’ electoral map looks like this.

 

If you’ve been paying attention to the electoral maps, you’ll recall that Michigan, Wisconsin and Pennsylvania used to lean Obama just a month ago.  Check out where they are now.  Notice that North Carolina and Missouri have both–finally–fallen into the Romney orbit.  Wrap your mind around New Hampshire trending towards the GOP presidential ticket.

In other words, Romney’s momentum has put formerly Obama states back in the toss-up column and moved other states into the Republican orbit.  Meanwhile, Obama has not made inroads into Romney’s safe or leaning states.  Obama now has to defend his firewall from serious Republican inroads, while Mitt hasn’t had to defend traditional GOP strongholds.

According to the statists, all that means St. Barry is a lead pipe lock.

 

Even worse, Team Bamster isn’t waiting for the President to lose on Election Day to pass around rifle rounds for their circular firing squad.  Take a guess who’s taking a trip under Premier Barry’s bus.

[Matt] Bai’s choice for the person who steered the president wrong this year is none other than former President Bill Clinton, who has widely been credited for having helped produce a post-convention boost for the Democrats. Clinton’s speech on behalf of Obama was viewed, with good reason, as being far more effective than anything the president or anyone else said on his behalf this year. But Bai points to Clinton as the primary advocate within high Democratic circles for changing the party’s strategy from one of bashing Mitt Romney as an inauthentic flip-flopper to one that centered on trying to assert that he was a conservative monster. Given that Romney demolished that false image in one smashing debate performance in Denver that seems to have changed the arc of the election, Clinton’s advice seems ripe for second-guessing right now.

Lets be clear:  Bill Clinton has done more than any other prominent Democrat to carry Barack Obama’s sorry ass across the finish line.  Not Harry Reid.  Not Nancy Pelosi.  Not even Eva Longoria.

But now that pResident is about to shit the White House mattress, of course David Axelrod feeds Matt Bai the pre-emptive first strike on Slick Willy.

Amazing, really.

But the die-hard Outer Party hacks have no interest in reality.  They think Obama has this election in the bag.

So when Romney wins, watch out for much banging of spoons on high chairs.  But unlike the Republicans in 2008, the Democrats and their base will do no soul-searching.  There won’t be any ideological reassessment on the Left.

In the wake of an Obama defeat, the nutroots will take the easiest most emotionally gratifying path they know: An insane voter suppression conspiracy theory.  And just like in 2000 and 2004, the mainstream media will egg on every MoveOn.Org/DemocratUnderground charge.  The Leftwing Palace Guard, saddened by their Jesus figure’s electoral defeat, will do all they can to encourage a resurgent Occupy movement to shit on cop cars and scream in bug-eyed rage at Mitt Romney, Wall Street and conventional ideas about hygiene.

 

Posted in Domestic Happenings | Tagged: , , | 10 Comments »

Because Fashion Is A Passion For The With-It And Hip

Posted by KingShamus on June 18, 2012

Even as the with-it and hip turn out to be self-destructive weirdos being led around by an icy unlikable shrew.

Last week, President Obama made headlines by enlisting two relatively unknown New York City residents–Hollywood film star Sarah Jessica Parker and Vogue edidictatorette Anna Wintour –to host a big-ticket fundraiser for his 2012 reelection campaign.  Naturally the fifty guests who coughed up $40,000 to dine with the President made it a great success, even if SJP’s house didn’t quite meet Ms. Wintour’s exacting standards.

Anyhoo, the confab got blogger-homie Edge of The Sandbox thinking about Ms. Wintour’s place in the fashion industry.

[Anna] Wintour became the Editor-in-Chief of American Vogue in 1988, when supermodels ruled the catwalk.  They were gorgeous and skinny, but had some sort of curve on their improbably thin and long bones.  Cindy Crawford recalls that back in her days models wore the US size 6; they are now zero or 2.  Very few women can have the kind of bodies and the faces that grace the covers of fashion magazines because these covers represented an unattainable ideal.  I know that, and I’m not raving mad because I don’t look like Cindy Crawford.  This is not to suggest that there were no anorexic models in the 80s, but the causes of anorexia nervosa are complicated, and the 80s supermodels were valid as a female ideal.  There were no mistaking them for underdeveloped girls, and no doubt that they turned heads.

Shortly after Wintour assumed the Vogue leadership, the fashion industry elevated a mousy junkie Kate Moss to the status of a fashion icon.  Heroin chic became all the rage, and Moss’s reputation for hard partying solidified her hold on the industry.  Moss did at least six US Vogue covers — far less than the UK and France editions, but still a formidable number.  Last year, Anna Wintour dedicated the cover of her September issue to the wedding of Kate Moss.  Makes me wonder how much space she will devote to her divorce.

It’s a great post, so make sure to clickie that linkie and read the rest of it.

Lots of folks decry the impact that fashion magazines have on women.  The critiques usually go something like this:  The glossy spreads devoted to high-end clothes and pricey beauty creates almost unreachable heights of glamour.  Moreover, the low single digit–or no digit–size of the models are held up as a standard of feminine beauty that almost no woman can live up to except through drugs and/or eating disorders.

Let’s repeat a line of questioning Robert Stacy McCain has asked before:  Who edits the fashion magazines?  Who designs the clothes?  Who hires the models?  Who runs the modelling agencies?

Oh…that’s right.  Bitchy queens and plain old bitches.

Who buys the magazines that create all these problems we love to complain about?  By and large, its women and gay dudes.  Besides George Costanza, straight men don’t read or purchase glossies like Vogue.

Finally, who are the consumers of the clothes in the fashion rags?  It’s women.  To be fair, heterosexual males will pay the $900 it takes to buy a size 2 Dolce & Gabbana dress for their wives or girlfriends.  But they don’t pay much attention to the fashionista trends that make their women want the piece in the first place.  The only reason they’re picking up the D&G swag, as opposed to the girly-cut New York Giants jersey or the lady-fit camo coveralls, is because their chicks dig the frilly dress.

We can with some justification bemoan the influence a nasty hag like Anna Wintour has over our sense of beauty and fashion.  The people who made throwing up after every meal and snorting Hefty bags coke a prerequisite of style are decadent ghouls.  They are to be avoided, not emulated or encouraged.

The problem is that many people–both men and women–have become enablers of these monsters by throwing so much money at the designers and propagandists who push this wacked out standard of beauty.  If we really think heroin chic is gross, why don’t women stop trying to be a size 0?  If we actually like the classic feminine hourglass shape, how come we don’t see guys encouraging their women to double up on the Death By Chocolate cheesecake every once in a while?

In short, Anna Wintour’s aesthetic sensibilities would not be in vogue…or in Vogue for that matter…if we didn’t buy into it.  Anorexia as a dramatic charming fashion statement, as opposed to a life threatening medical condition, is our own fault.  Until we recognize that, we’ll never actually deal with the problem we keep insisting we must address.

More:  I really do mean it when I say that guys have to shoulder some of the blame for the uber-gaunt look that dominates fashion.  Men have girlfriends and wives.  That fact presupposes that dudes will have at least some influence over the women in their lives.  If they really don’t want their lady friends to be shaped like match-sticks, they should say so–in vociferous ways if necessary.

On the other hand, I hear a lot of women hate on the metrosexual look on men.  Yet here we are in 2012, and there are still guys who engage in elaborate manscaping rituals.  Ladies, if you don’t want the man in your life to look like an 11-year-old girl, you’re gonna have to stop taking him for mani-pedis at your nail salon.  You like your fellow to have a hairy chest?  Refrain from telling him about the great waxing place you heard about downtown.  Are you sick of your husband spending 3 hours a day doing crunches to make sure his abs are perfectly toned?  Stock the fridge with a case of Guinness Asphalt and cancel his gym membership, STAT.

Posted in The Social Scene | Tagged: , , , , , | 4 Comments »

Hot Air Debate? I Vote Aye!

Posted by KingShamus on January 24, 2012

Did anybody watch last night’s GOP presidential candidate debate on NBC? Apparently, 7.5 million people sat through it. One wonders how many people managed to keep their eyes open past the first hour.

To be fair, I was catching up on the zany antics of everyone’s favorite misanthrope doctor on “House” (Spoiler Alert: Crotchety title character says rude things to people) so I missed the first hour of the debate. Once I got around to Brian Williams & Co.’s turgid after-school detention session cleverly masquerading itself as a debate, within a minute it was clear something was up. Turns out that NBC made applause verboten within the auditorium. What should’ve been ‘Newt v. Mitt-Thunderdome’ morphed into a Lunesta-enhanced quaalude-soaked Ambien-fortified paint-drying observation session. With socialists as the hosts. By the time Mitt or Newt or Santorum or whoever started talking about self-deportation–I was starting to get drowsy, so the memory is hazy–I was wishing I could self-deport myself to a time when I didn’t know NBC was holding their shitty debate.

I saw no questions about Solyndra, Fast-n-Furious or the looming collapse of the Eurozone. So of course the candidates had to answer a question about Terri Schiavo. Apparently America has so few pressing problems that we have to go back seven years to find trouble.

Naturally, I did a fair amount of pissing and moaning about this on Twitter. Because whining about stuff always helps, right? Leave it up to the professionals at Hot Air to actually try to do something about it.

Last night, my friend Peter Ingemi expressed his dissatisfaction with the NBC debate — and the presidential debates in general — by proposing that Hot Air run a Republican primary debate, moderated by yours truly. Peter says he’s “dead serious” about this:

Just watched yet another GOP debate and was totally unamazed by the lack of questions on fast and furious and BS questions such as: “Why did the Bush Tax Cuts fail?”. I think political types are sick of questions from people who want the GOP to fail.
I have a solution:
I suggest Hotair send an invitation to each candidate for a 2 hour debate moderated by Ed Morrissey.

This got quite a response on Twitter last night and this morning. It even has its own hashtag, #hotairdebate, and it’s been endorsed by the Boss Emeritus, Senate primary candidate Jamie Radtke, and a number of bloggers. It even got an Instapundit endorsement, who said the proposal “sounds like a winner.”

Sounds like a winner to me too.

For those of you who have teh Twitterz, I say we all tweet Mitt, Newt, Santorum and Paul’s Twitter accounts asking them–politely–if they could take part in a Hot Air debate. Hashtag the message with #hotairdebate. Lather, rinse, repeat for a good long while until somebody responds.

If they say yes, fine. If they say no, ask for an explanation. I mean, why would the GOP nominees allow themselves to be hammered by the raft of CNN/ABC/CBS/NBC lefty hack reporters, yet not take part in a debate at Hot Air?

Every single one of these candidates professes his fidelity to American conservatism. They seek the nomination of a party that advertises itself as a right-leaning caucus. All four of these men should jump at the chance to defend their records, define their ideas and make the case for their campaigns in front of a Hot Air audience.

Conservatives are rightfully annoyed by the debates.  They’ve been run by liberals and for liberals.  A Hot Air debate would do much to rectify the MSM bias in this primary season.

UPDATE:  Dan Collins over at the great Conservatory links!  Big ups, homie.  Thanks.

Posted in Domestic Happenings, Media Silliness | Tagged: , | 2 Comments »

Rick Perry’s Out and I’m Live-Tweeting The Debate Tonight

Posted by KingShamus on January 19, 2012

I guess we won’t have Rick Perry to kick around anymore.

Rick Perry is a good man, and he deserved a better campaign than he got, but his political advisers — Dave Carney and those other guys — had all the wrong ideas, and thus Perry’s “mission” was destined to failure from the outset. Exactly how these men, so widely hailed as shrewd strategists, got so many things so badly wrong is a story that I’m sure will be the subject of many campaign post mortems, like Jennifer Jacobs’s excellent examination of what went wrong with Michele Bachmann’s campaign. But I have neither time nor inclination to offer a full analysis today.

Yeah, it’s over.

I wasn’t nearly as down on the Perry candidacy as McCain was…or still is.  I liked the fact that Perry was getting better as the debates progressed.  I dug his tenacity even in the face of his campaign going terminally pear-shaped.  In the end though, all of Perry’s strengths couldn’t overcome that horrendous beginning. 

In any case, now we’re stuck with Mittens versus the AntiRomney horde.  Tonight’s debate should answer some questions; specifically will Ron Paul break out his fanciest tin-foil hat for this solemn occasion?  Can Mittster flip-flop his positions within a single answer?  Will Rachel Maddow be there to ask Newt Gingrich about the pleasures of an open marriage?  Will George Stephanopanoloppalopopafloppaopapophloppoloploppoppoapaopapoaoulous be on hand to ask  Rick Santorum if Gingrich should’ve worn a jimmy-hat while carrying on his multiple affairs?

As for me I’ll be on Twitter if ya’all wanna chat during the debate.  I’ll be snipping at Romney–and everyone else.  See you on teh intertubes.

Posted in Domestic Happenings, Politicians behaving badly | Tagged: , , , , , , | 2 Comments »

Herman Cain, David Axelrod and the Chicago Way

Posted by KingShamus on November 11, 2011

Many right-of-center writers have made the argument that all the allegations against Herman Cain makes it politically hazardous for the GOP to nominate the former Godfather’s Pizza CEO.

I agree. It would be tough to defend Cain against numerous sexual harassment charges.  But are we really dealing with a candidate with a zipper problem?

Herman Cain​ has spent his life living and working all over the country — Indiana, Georgia, Minnesota, Nebraska, Kansas, Washington, D.C. — but never in Chicago.

So it’s curious that all the sexual harassment allegations against Cain emanate from Chicago: home of the Daley machine and Obama consigliere David Axelrod​.

Suspicions had already fallen on Sheila O’Grady, who is close with David Axelrod and went straight from being former Chicago mayor Richard M. Daley’s chief of staff to president of the Illinois Restaurant Association (IRA), as being the person who dug up Herman Cain’s personnel records from the National Restaurant Association (NRA).

The Daley-controlled IRA works hand-in-glove with the NRA. And strangely enough, Cain’s short, three-year tenure at the NRA is evidently the only period in his decades-long career during which he’s alleged to have been a sexual predator.

After O’Grady’s name surfaced in connection with the miraculous appearance of Cain’s personnel files from the NRA, she issued a Clintonesque denial of any involvement in producing them — by vigorously denying that she knew Cain when he was at the NRA. (Duh.)

And now, after a week of conservative eye-rolling over unspecified, anonymous accusations against Cain, we’ve suddenly got very specific sexual assault allegations from an all-new accuser out of … Chicago.

Herman Cain has never lived in Chicago. But you know who has? David Axelrod! And guess who lived in Axelrod’s very building? Right again: Cain’s latest accuser, Sharon Bialek.

Read the rest.  Coulter lays out Team Barry’s long sordid history of dirty tactics.

Ann Coulter understands what David Axelrod knows on an instinctive level and what many conservatives sadly will never get through their thick skulls: “He sends one of yours to the hospital, you send one of his to the morgue.”  All we have here is the latest iteration of the Obama-Alinsky strategy for dispatching inconvenient people who get in the way of Affirmative Action Barry’s political aspirations.  

So how have some righties reacted to what is obviously a hatchet-job orchestrated by the Windy City’s most notorious tub of bile?

Ummmm, not as well as one would hope.

Well, after Bialek, the allegations against Cain now have a face and a name. And again, they might be entirely false. But again, the allegations are succeeding in knocking the Cain campaign off of whatever game it once might have had, and any confidence that Herman Cain will be able to survive the Republican nomination contest–let alone a race against the veteran campaign squad that is bound and determined to get Barack Obama a second term in the White House–ought to be completely dissipated by now. Oh, I am sure that there remain some Cainiacs who hold out the last, desperate vestiges of hope that somehow, someway, their candidate will recover, Lazarus-like, capture the GOP nomination, and win the White House. But why should anyone put anymore stock into their tired, Baghdad Bobesque assurances that everything is all right, that the Cain campaign is walking on water (before turning it into wine), and that the former pizza executive has his opponents right where he wants them?

There may very well be more revelations about Cain’s behavior. This ride is not even close to being over yet. And I write that as someone who very much wants this ride to be over; we have serious economic policy, foreign policy, and national security issues to discuss in the run-up to the primaries, the caucuses, and the general election scheduled less than a year from today. Unfortunately, we are not talking about those issues, because of the soap opera that is Herman Cain’s Presidential campaign.

That last bit is the best.

Herman Cain is the target of a David Axelrod slime job.  The Obama re-election campaign is dredging up every half-assed allegation they can find against the GOP candidate.  They’re employing their ideological allies in the mainstream media to turn rumors and long settled complaints into front-page stories.

So of course, it’s Herman Cain’s fault that we’re not talking about the economic policy, foreign policy or national security issues.

Similarly, if it wasn’t for those pesky underage boys getting raped by Jerry Sandusky on Penn State football coach Joe Paterno’s watch, we could all focus on the Nittany Lion squad beating Nebraska on Saturday.  

[sarc/]

It’s amazing.  Has Herman Cain spent the last 12 months bringing up any sex scandals involving Barack Obama?  Has Herman Cain spent his entire campaign playing footsie with the Barack Obama birther issue?  Has Herman Cain talked about Bill Ayers, Bernadine Dorn or Pastor Jeremiah Wright?   

In fact, Herman Cain has been pretty good about pushing his ideas out to the public.  All he’s done is talked about the serious issues that he cares about.  Now he finds himself embroiled in a mess created by Obama’s campaign team and aided by their buddies in the left-wing media.  What do some conservatives want to do?  Blame the victim and toss him overboard at the first opportunity. 

Why?  Because Gloria Allred thinks it’s a good idea?  Because David Gregory thinks Cain damages other Republicans?  Because the media is making it tough?  Is that the standard for judging candidates we’re going with now? 

The truth is, it’s Obama–not Cain–that doesn’t want to talk about issues.  Obama doesn’t want that because if the election comes down to a referendum on Barack’s record, he’ll lose.  If you’re concerned that we’re not talking about America’s various problems, let’s start by laying the blame where it belongs, which is at the feet of the President and his minions instead of the guy who’s been focused on ideas from the get-go.  

Here’s a question for all the Cain-haters who are using this moment of weakness to tear down the prominent GOP candidate:  What happens when it’s your favorite candidate getting hammered by a Democrat Party and MSM tag-team ‘scandal’?  Will you be there loudly clamoring for him or her to stand aside because the MSM says the person is no longer a viable candidate?  Or will you expect the rest of the conservative movement to circle the wagons and defend your personal favorite?

Here’s how I think it’ll go down: “Herman Cain wasn’t a real candidate.  He was only leading in national polls and gaining fundraising momentum, but he was never going to win.  But Gingrich/Perry/Bachmann/Paul is the real deal, so pretty please defend my preferred candidate against this latest unfounded media-driven scandal.”   

Yeah.  I’ll get right on that.

What these folks don’t seem to get is that the Democrats and the MSM (but I repeat myself) are not going to be satisfied just taking out Herman Cain.  Every scrap of innuendo, every half-hushed whisper, every stitch of gossip about all these candidates is being dug up by Obama’s opposition research team.  If we let them, once they’re done with Cain Team Bamster will move on to the next GOP candidate that poses a threat to Obama’s re-election.  They’ll float a story to their pals at the New York Times, MSNBC or Newsweek.  Within days, the court stenographers in the MSM will dutifully report yet another half-fabricated pack of nonsense, all under the ruse that they’re just ‘vetting the candidate’.

If a guy like Herman Cain can’t expect to get even a little support from other conservatives, why don’t we just throw in the fucking towel, give the Left what they really want and nominate Mitt Romney right now?  That way, when he loses in 2012, we can get ourselves all psyched up to nominate the next milquetoast establishmentarian compassionate conservative doucherocket in line for the 2016 race.

Look, if Herman Cain truly is a serial sexual creep, then it’s over for him.  But so far what evidence do we have here?  His accusers just aren’t credible.  Their stories don’t make sense.  We’re left with unsubstantiated crap that should be at the bottom of Jonathan Martin’s garbage can instead of on the front page of Politico.

Here’s the other thing:  Nobody is expecting Santorum supporters or Huntsman fans or anybody else to switch sides.  If you support another candidate, feel free to continue to do so.  But if you think you can build your dude up by using a left-wing hit job to tear Cain down, you’re just the guy feeding your buddies to an alligator in the hopes that the predator eats you last.

Posted in Domestic Happenings | Tagged: , , , , | 8 Comments »

The Enduring Genius of Occupy Wall Street, Part Deux

Posted by KingShamus on October 10, 2011

Bless you, Crack Emcee.  Bless you.

My friend No One Of Any Import (who is actually a very important blogger) is concerned about the OccupyEveryFuckingWhereWeWantEvenIfWeDoNotGetPermitsBecauseWeAreSoMorallySuperiorToEveryone. 

Then I got around to reading a post over at FilmLadd. (Drat. I can’t remember who led me to FilmLadd, so I can’t do the via link.) In that post, Mr. Ehlinger makes an unsettling point:

“My hunch is that these protests aren’t about accomplishing anything right now except to flex their muscles, test out the police, and see which supporters “they” (the White House) can count on.

In short: #OccupyWallStreet is a dry run for November 2012.”

Hmm. That sounds bad . . . and yet plausible.

First of all, No-1 and Ehlinger are exactly correct.  This is a dress rehearsal for Obambi’s re-election campaign.

And just look at the incoherent ideological clown costumes these dildotrons have elected to dress themselves in.

Occupy Wall Street and it’s various spin-offs represent the Huggies-fudging foot-stamping temper tantrum of America’s economic illiterates.  These are the type of people who actually take their Trotskyite college economics professor seriously instead of shotgunning a few beers and forgetting Hegels’ dialectic.  Then they have the nerve to get pissed off when they rack up a $100K in college debt for a degree they can’t get a job with because their Jesus-figure President has gleefully vaporized the economy.

Speaking of incoherence, the Occupy Wall Street crowd is really pissed off at big corporations.  Good thing Barack Obama isn’t in the pocket of those greedy multinational conglomerates or anything.

Despite his rhetorical attacks on Wall Street, a study by the Sunlight Foundation’s Influence Project shows that President Barack Obama has received more money from Wall Street than any other politician over the past 20 years, including former President George W. Bush.

In 2008, Wall Street’s largesse accounted for 20 percent of Obama’s total take, according to Reuters. …

By the end of Barack Obama’s 2008 campaign, executives and others connected with Wall Street firms, such as Goldman Sachs, Bank of America, Citigroup, UBS AG, JPMorgan Chase, and Morgan Stanley, poured nearly $15.8 million into his coffers.

Goldman Sachs contributed slightly over $1 million to Obama’s 2008 presidential campaign, compared with a little over $394,600 to the 2004 Bush campaign. Citigroup gave $736,771 to Obama in 2008, compared with $320,820 to Bush in 2004. Executives and others connected with the Swiss bank UBS AG donated $539,424 to Obama’s 2008 campaign, compared with $416,950 to Bush in 2004. And JP Morgan Chase gave Obama’s campaign $808,799 in 2008, but did not show up among Bush’s top donors in 2004, according to the Center for Responsive Politics.

Hey doe-eyed left-wing dreamers–You wanted President Hopey McChangenstein?  Try this on for size.

In short, Occupy Wall Street is the bastion of dupes, marks and suckers.

I have a suggestion.  Instead of worrying about what these wannabe Jacobins and never-will-be Guevaras will say, how’s about we let them talk?  Let them spew every wackadoo economic theory they want.  Allow them to indulge in every empty-headed rhetorical argument they want to.  Finally–and this will seem slightly heretical–I say we give them just enough room to engage in really stupid acts of public racism and idiocy.

Then, when they say and do stupid shit like the Lotion Man, we refute it   It’s not gonna be all that hard.  Making fun of bowel-stewing bigotry and doltish left-wing platitudes is always good.  Ya know what the best part is about shining a big ol’ zillion candlepower spotlight on these flaming jackasses?  The more they do, the more the rest of the country is going to hate them. 

Some people might get taken in by the OWS message.  Let’s be realistic, though.  Most people know that, even as bad as some companies can be, you still need them to create jobs.  In a nation where unemployment is at 9.1%, the majority of citizens in America understand that the last thing we need to do is go full retard socialist on businesses. 

We should not be too concerned that Occupy Wall Street is just the Left’s dry run for getting the Golfer-in-chief re-elected.  If this is the kind of campaign they want to run next year, we shouldn’t fear it.  We should welcome it with every fiber of our being.    

You wanna play the ‘pierced-septum 27 year old college sophomore living off of Mom ‘n Dad’s dime’ card, liberals?  Be our guest.  You Stalinists up for a game of ‘Scratch A Lefty, Find An Hate-Filled Anti-Semite’?  So are we.  Ya’all think you’re strong enough for a repeat of the sixties-era Days of Rage?  Let’s do this thing, hammer-heads.

If the Right has any brains in it’s collective skulls, they’ll use this moment of extreme left-wing windowlicking to highlight just how pretentious, mindless and destructive American liberalism has become.  They’ll then use every horrible progressive idea and action that comes out of the Occupy Wall Street movement and promptly club the lefty caucus over the head.  Lather, rinse, repeat for the next twelve months until all the polite well-mannered lefties disown the OWS crowd for fear of being tarred with the same humiliating brush.

I guess what I am trying to say is:  My fellow right-wing bitter clingers, go forth and mercilessly mock.

UPDATE:  Just as I was scratching out my mini-opus, the great RS McCain gives us a shining blaze pink example of the wacko lefty shit we can laugh at from the Occupy Wall Street conniption.

Here is the PDF of the Workers World Party announcement of their national conference(note the tributes to Che Guevara) and here, in its entirety, is their call to action:

SOCIALIST CONFERENCE TO STAND IN SOLIDARITY WITH OCCUPY WALL STREET,
Oct. 8 & 9

Abolish Capitalism,
Fight for Socialism

In the Spirit of Troy Davis:
“Dismantle this unjust system”

Stop.

Stop.

Stop right there.

‘In the spirit of Troy Davis’?  Troy Davis?  You mean the same Troy Davis that killed a cop in front of a bunch of eyewitnesses?  We should dismantle ‘the system’ in the spirit of a convicted cop-killer; is that what you’re saying, Worker’s World Party?

Well, being that you guys are Stalinists it only makes sense you’d want to change the American economic system through murderous violence.  Way to go with that playing exactly to type thing you got going there.

Posted in Domestic Happenings | Tagged: , , , , , | 14 Comments »

The 2008 GOP Field Need Not Apply in 2012

Posted by KingShamus on December 31, 2010

My blog-homie Annoy The Left returns from hiatus with a warning:

Dear Republican Party,

If you nominate Mike Huckabee or Mitt Romney in 2012 I will officially disown you. I will disregard all warnings against supporting a third party. I will throw all the weight I have behind the most conservative, probably Libertarian, candidate that I can find and I’ll drag as many voters with me as I can muster. I can assure you that I won’t be the only one to do this.

Nailed it.

In fact, none of the GOP candidates who ran in 2008 need to even bother.  They all suck. 

Fred Thompson:  Right on the issues, wrong on nap-time.

Ron Paul:  Has intelligent ideas about fiscal policy, but can the GOP expect to win with a dude over three quarters of a century old against the relatively youthful Obama?

Duncan Hunter:  Cool dude.  Not bad on any big domestic or foreign issue.  The trouble is that the guy has absolutely no pizzazz.  That a smart, reasonable and competent man like Hunter is too boring to get elected says something pretty bad about the American electorate, but that’s the reality of the situation.

Rudy Giuliani:  Oh Lord.  Pro-abortion, anti-Second Amendment and during the campaign he couldn’t get out of his own way.  The ‘Wait till Florida to compete’ primary strategy will go down as one of the spectacularly bone-headed political moves in the history of politics.

 John McCain:  The GOP base can barely stand the guy being a Senator in Arizona.  The Republican rank-n-file sat on their hands when he ran the ‘Let’s Be Nice To Barack’ campaign in 2008.  They’ll do the same in 2012.  Oh yeah, he was BFF’s with John the Baptist and had a doe-eyed crush on Catherine The Great when they both had 5th period chemistry in high school.

Mitt Romney:  ObamaCare is basically RomneyCare writ large.  America shouldn’t have to choose between a Republican liberal and Donkey-Puncher liberal.  Also, Romney is a bloodless technocrat who has a very iffy relationship to the pro-life cause.  He’d be the perfect CEO of an advertising firm in 1960.

Mike Huckabee:  He’s a clever fellow who’s quick with a joke.  He’s also the second coming of compassionate conservatism.  Go to the back of the short bus, sit down and shut the hell up.

So I’ll go one better than Annoy The Left.  If the GOP nominates any of those 2008 clowns, I’m tapping the fuck out on the Republican Party.  Not only that, I’ll use this rinky-dink blog to convince anybody and everybody I can to vote for an independent in 2012.

I really don’t want Barack Obama to be president anymore.  He makes Jimmy Carter seem like a genius.  Unfortunately we have to wait till 2012 to unelect the Teleprompter-Reader In Chief.  None of last election’s GOP candidates have a Detroit Lions’ prayer of beating the President.  That means I refuse to be part of any dumb-shit quixotic campaign that’s doomed to fail.  Just because the homeboy running against Obamster happens to have an ‘R’ behind his name doesn’t mean I have to jump on board a ship with more holes in it than the golf course at Pebble Beach.

Posted in Politicians behaving badly | Tagged: , , , , , , , , , | 11 Comments »

 
Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 4,334 other followers

%d bloggers like this: