We think it was the great and powerful TBogg who opined that some people choose abstinence, others have it thrust upon them. Apparently, the latter category having been handed the reigns of power by our democratic system (or what's left of it) have attempted to make their circumstance the choice of all those rutting little bags of raging hormones generally referred to in polite society as "the kids."
It's worked about as well as you might have thought it would had you ever been young and had the stink of abstinence on you like hopelessness. Not that we ever...well... technically...um...see...look, choice is such a slippery word. Besides, what about Elizabeth? Did she choose to wear those skirts with the slit up the side? Did she choose to walk by your desk five times a day in History class? Did she choose to flaunt that glimpse of perfect thigh just inches from our fevered brows? And what about Natalie, running to the bus after school, the sun glancing off that golden hair, those legs, so long and tanned flashing under her billowing summer dress, so perfect...yes, it's all coming back to us now like an old movie seen again after many years. A movie with a sad ending. Many sad endings. Many sad, lonely endings. Excuse us a minute.
Yes. Well. Where were we?
The number of states refusing federal money for "abstinence-only" sex education programs jumped sharply in the past year as evidence mounted that the approach is ineffective. We think by "evidence" they mean in most classes the students end up explaining things to the teachers, but we're not sure about that.
"We're concerned about this," said Stan Koutstaal of the Department of Health and Human Services, which runs the program. "My greatest concern about states dropping out is that these are valuable services and programs. It's the youths in these states who are missing out."
Um...no Mr. Koutstaal, the "youths" haven't been missing out, and that's the problem.
The trend has triggered intense lobbying of state legislators and governors around the country. Supporters of the programs are scrambling to reverse the decisions, while opponents are pressuring more states to join the trend.
See, here's the problem. supporters are doing this, opponents are doing that. WHO'S WATCHING THE KIDS?
"We hope that it sends a message to the politicians in Washington that this program needs to change, and states need to be able to craft a program that has some connection to reality for their young people and that is not a dictated by Washington ideologues," William Smith of the Sexuality Information and Education Council of the United States said.
"Hey. I'm no ideologue," Koutstaal said. "I've had dates,"
"Our critics would have governors believe that these programs are just somebody standing in front of the class wagging a finger and saying, 'No. No. No. Don't have sex.' That's not what these classes entail," Valerie Huber of the National Abstinence Education Association said. "We have five or 10 people standing in front of the class wagging a finger and saying, 'No. No. No. Don't have sex.'"
The jump in states opting out follows a series of reports questioning the effectiveness of the approach, including one commissioned by Congress that was released earlier this year. The "Foley Report" showed a distinct drop in Congress members practicing abstinence starting with the republican takeover of both houses.
"This abstinence-only program is just not getting the job done," said Cecile Richards of the Planned Parenthood Federation of America. "Just look at those horndogs in Congress. Telling them to keep it in their pants is about as useful as a screen door on a submarine.
"Um...this is about the kids," said Koutstaal.
"Oh, yeah. Sorry," Richards replied.
Koutstaal took issue with critics who blame abstinence programs for the increase in teen births, noting that rates have continued to decline for 10-to-14-year-olds -- the ages typically targeted by the programs. "I think it's awfully hard to blame abstinence education for the increase in birth rates," he said. "Sure, as soon as they get out of the program they go at it like rabbits on steroids but is that our fault? It's abstinence only, not abstinence always.
Showing posts with label Republicans. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Republicans. Show all posts
Wednesday, December 19, 2007
Thursday, October 25, 2007
How Can We Be In Washington Voting Against Kids When We're In California Pretending To Care About Fire Victims?
We've tried to stay out of this whole SCHIP thing, because, well frankly we're not that big a fan of children. It seems to us they are far too young for their own good, and since they don't have jobs, they're always asking adults for money to buy the things adults are trying to convince them they can't live without.
Anyway, we've been thinking this is just another opportunity for democrats to prove they couldn't pass legislation out of a paper bag if one end was open, but then we read this:
House Republicans are fuming over Democrats' decision to hold the next vote on the State Children's Health Insurance Program when many Republicans will be in California with president Bush staging photo ops in areas hit by wildfires.
"Five to seven members are going, all of whom would be 'no' votes, and [Democrats] know it," House Republican Whip Roy Blunt said. "This is clearly designed to minimize Republican opposition to children. Well, not children, just sick children. I mean poor sick children. Wait. Can we talk about Obama's lapel pin instead?"
At a meeting of Republican House members to discuss the revised bill, Rep. Louis Gohmert of Texas said the Democrats are "taking advantage of a disaster to loot the American treasury. Now granted, we've pretty much finished that job in the last six years, but I just don't want some other cat peeing in my litterbox if you get my drift."
Thirteen Republicans from fire-stricken districts signed a letter to House Speaker Nancy Pelosi urging her as "Teh Cave'n Masta" to postpone the vote. "Members should not have to choose between shafting poor kids in Washington or being in California helping our constituents to get the aid they need to rebuild their homes and their lives," they wrote.
Hahahahaha. "Helping constituents." That's pretty funny. Oh look dear, here comes our Congressperson to stand in front of the smoldering ruins of our house and tell the press he's anti fire and if it wasn't the for the fact that the treasury is broke paying for the war he would certainly vote to give everyone free buckets.
But Democratic House aides defended the scheduling of the vote. Stacey Bernards, spokesperson for House Majority Leader Steny Hoyer, said Democrats are affected by the fires too. "The fires aren't partisan, despite what James Hartline says" she said. "We are very concerned for the victims of the fires but tomorrow's vote outcome will not be affected by Republicans and Democrats who will not be there. They sort of cancel one another out. At least the ones that are sober enough to vote."
In a press conference, Democratic leaders announced the new bill will include changes on major issues that Republicans complained about in the last debate. They said it will tighten the restriction on illegal immigrants receiving SCHIP benefits; cap the income levels of families eligible for SCHIP; move adults out of SCHIP faster; and include new provisions to encourage SCHIP families to keep private health insurance.
Republican Judy Biggert -- who voted against the original bill, described the changes as "cosmetic. They're still giving free medical care to poor kids," she said. "That's just not the American way."
Representative Charles Dent, a Republican who supported the bill, said that he believes there will be "some defections, but not many." He suggested Democrats would win more votes if they held the bill until next week. When asked why he thought that way Dent revised his position. "Coming back from a place where all they had to do was act like they cared to actually doing something that proves they care?. Nah. What was I thinking?"
A House Republican leadership aide who attended their closed door meeting said no members indicated they would change their vote. "Each member has written his original vote on his arm with a Sharpie," the aide said.
Anyway, we've been thinking this is just another opportunity for democrats to prove they couldn't pass legislation out of a paper bag if one end was open, but then we read this:
House Republicans are fuming over Democrats' decision to hold the next vote on the State Children's Health Insurance Program when many Republicans will be in California with president Bush staging photo ops in areas hit by wildfires.
"Five to seven members are going, all of whom would be 'no' votes, and [Democrats] know it," House Republican Whip Roy Blunt said. "This is clearly designed to minimize Republican opposition to children. Well, not children, just sick children. I mean poor sick children. Wait. Can we talk about Obama's lapel pin instead?"
At a meeting of Republican House members to discuss the revised bill, Rep. Louis Gohmert of Texas said the Democrats are "taking advantage of a disaster to loot the American treasury. Now granted, we've pretty much finished that job in the last six years, but I just don't want some other cat peeing in my litterbox if you get my drift."
Thirteen Republicans from fire-stricken districts signed a letter to House Speaker Nancy Pelosi urging her as "Teh Cave'n Masta" to postpone the vote. "Members should not have to choose between shafting poor kids in Washington or being in California helping our constituents to get the aid they need to rebuild their homes and their lives," they wrote.
Hahahahaha. "Helping constituents." That's pretty funny. Oh look dear, here comes our Congressperson to stand in front of the smoldering ruins of our house and tell the press he's anti fire and if it wasn't the for the fact that the treasury is broke paying for the war he would certainly vote to give everyone free buckets.
But Democratic House aides defended the scheduling of the vote. Stacey Bernards, spokesperson for House Majority Leader Steny Hoyer, said Democrats are affected by the fires too. "The fires aren't partisan, despite what James Hartline says" she said. "We are very concerned for the victims of the fires but tomorrow's vote outcome will not be affected by Republicans and Democrats who will not be there. They sort of cancel one another out. At least the ones that are sober enough to vote."
In a press conference, Democratic leaders announced the new bill will include changes on major issues that Republicans complained about in the last debate. They said it will tighten the restriction on illegal immigrants receiving SCHIP benefits; cap the income levels of families eligible for SCHIP; move adults out of SCHIP faster; and include new provisions to encourage SCHIP families to keep private health insurance.
Republican Judy Biggert -- who voted against the original bill, described the changes as "cosmetic. They're still giving free medical care to poor kids," she said. "That's just not the American way."
Representative Charles Dent, a Republican who supported the bill, said that he believes there will be "some defections, but not many." He suggested Democrats would win more votes if they held the bill until next week. When asked why he thought that way Dent revised his position. "Coming back from a place where all they had to do was act like they cared to actually doing something that proves they care?. Nah. What was I thinking?"
A House Republican leadership aide who attended their closed door meeting said no members indicated they would change their vote. "Each member has written his original vote on his arm with a Sharpie," the aide said.
Monday, October 22, 2007
If Ugly Was a Drop Of Water, Hllary'd Be The Pacific Ocean. But We'd Totally Hit That
OK, granted it's Monday after a weekend, which means we're a little...erm...out of phase. Now, we're not using that as an excuse for not watching the latest republican...ah...whatdyacallit...cliche' fest...no...panderrama...uh uh...Fred Thompson wake...mmm...oh, "debate." That's what the adults call it. Anyway, we didn't watch it because, well because there was fly dandruff in the pepper that needed to be removed. And after that the sock drawer was in a total state of chaos, plus we noticed our neighbor had painted his garage so we had to watch that dry.
We think you get our point. Turns out though, that like everyone else with an IQ above that of sparkling water the republicans are getting tired of each other because now they've started "debating" Hillary Clinton.
The bus load of screaming whackos (tm) staged their most contentious and personal "debate" of the long campaign season, clashing sharply over abortion, immigration, tort reform and their readiness to challenge Senator Hillary Rodham Clinton (D - Uppity Woman) in a general election.
The "debate's" opening minutes included a series of hissy fits that illustrated the growing stakes in the nominating battle. Former New York mayor Rudolph W. 9/11 and former Massachusetts governor Mitt position a day Romney were quickly put on the defensive, fending off criticism leveled by former senator Fred D. Thompson who managed to stay awake for twenty minutes of the "debate." A personal best. Thompson questioned their conservative credentials."If you were a true conservative you'd drive over to Hillary's house and egg it," Thompson said.
"I stopped 9/11 all by myself and rebuilt New York," Giuliani. "I'm not afraid of Hillary."
"Yeah, well if she was here right now I'd...I'd...I'd call her a big fat hag right to her face,"Romney said.
Thompson raked Giuliani for having supported federal funding of abortion, voting for the reelection of Democrat Mario Cuomo for governor in 1994, backing gun control and making New York a sanctuary city for immigrants. "He sides with Hillary Clinton on each of those issues," Thompson said.
"Do not," Giuliani responded.
"Do too," Romney added. "I bet you want to go steady with her."
Giuliani then jumped on Thompson, attacking his record in the Senate of opposing GOP-sponsored legislation to limit costly lawsuits. "Fred was the single biggest obstacle to tort reform in the United States Senate," he said. "He stood with democrats over and over again. Hillary's a democrat you know."
"What's a tort?" asked Thomapson.
One of the most personal attacks came when senator John McCain joined the fray, taking umbrage at Romney's recent statement that he speaks for the "Republican wing" of the Republican Party. "Governor Romney, you've been spending the last year trying to fool people about your record," McCain said. "I don't want you to start fooling them about mine. I stand on my record. I stand on my record of a conservative. Plus I once tried to run Hillary over."
Former Arkansas governor Mike Huckabee, who has been crowding his way into the top tier of the race, stood by throughout the early exchanges, then chided the others for attacking one another, saying, "Hey. I'm running for president too. Can somebody accuse me of liking Hillary?"
Prodded by Fox News's Chris Wallace, the Republican candidates unloaded on Clinton, describing her as unfit to be commander in chief, determined to create a government-run health system and a big-spending tax hiker, and an ugly headed poopy face. "I'm supposed to ask you guys questions about health care, the economy and the war and stuff people care about, but let's just forget that and call Hillary names," Wallace said.
"Fine with me," Romney replied. "I have so many positions I can't keep them straight anyway."
"Can we at least talk about 9/11," Giuliani asked.
"I'm a war hero," McCain said.
"Is there a restroom nearby?" Thompson wanted to know.
Wallace turned to Giuliani and compared him to Clinton, Giuliani said simply: "You've got to be kidding. You have got to be kidding." He quoted Clinton as saying: "I have a million ideas; America cannot afford them all," and then, with a sneer, said: "No kidding, Hillary -- America can't afford you."
"Oh no he di nit" the audience responded.
While the candidates echoed Bush's positions on several issues, they distinguished themselves from him as more hawkish on foreign policy, declaring that they would take a harder line against Russia and Iran. "All Bush could manage was to start two wars," Giuliani said. "If elected I'll be at war with Iran and North Korea before inauguration day.
"Yeah, well I'll be at war with Iran, North Korea and Mexico before the votes are counted," Romney countered.
"Gentlemen. Can we just get back to calling Hillary names," Fox news correspondent Wallace asked.
"Aren't we already at war with Iran," Thompson wanted to know.
"That's Iraq, senator. Try to keep up," Wallace answered.
Tancredo, Hunter and Paul played smaller roles. Tancredo accused House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Woman too.) of interfering in foreign policy and provoking Turkey at a sensitive moment by pushing a resolution on Armenian genocide. "Nancy Pelosi is not a very good speaker of the House, and she is an even lousier secretary of state," he said.
"Wait. I thought we were talking about Hillary," said Romney.
"They all look alike to me," Giuliani said.
"Nancy Pelosi" Isn't that Reagan's wife? asked Thompson.
Hunter answered a question about Social Security with a lecture on trade policy, prompting an incredulous Hume to ask: "Do you really think we can solve the Social Security and Medicare entitlement programs with trade policy?"
"No, but I'm sure Hillary does," Hunter responded.
Paul spoke passionately against the war in Iraq. But he also accused his Republican rivals of being for big government. "Our big-government conservatives, they're part of the neo-conservative movement. They've lost their traditions about traditional conservatism and the Constitution."
"I know you are, but what am I?" asked Romney.
"I hear Hillary likes the Constitution too." Giuliani said.
"Who's Hillary?" Thompson asked. By then most of the audience had left to watch Alan Keyes debate the Zorgons in the park across the street.
We think you get our point. Turns out though, that like everyone else with an IQ above that of sparkling water the republicans are getting tired of each other because now they've started "debating" Hillary Clinton.
The bus load of screaming whackos (tm) staged their most contentious and personal "debate" of the long campaign season, clashing sharply over abortion, immigration, tort reform and their readiness to challenge Senator Hillary Rodham Clinton (D - Uppity Woman) in a general election.
The "debate's" opening minutes included a series of hissy fits that illustrated the growing stakes in the nominating battle. Former New York mayor Rudolph W. 9/11 and former Massachusetts governor Mitt position a day Romney were quickly put on the defensive, fending off criticism leveled by former senator Fred D. Thompson who managed to stay awake for twenty minutes of the "debate." A personal best. Thompson questioned their conservative credentials."If you were a true conservative you'd drive over to Hillary's house and egg it," Thompson said.
"I stopped 9/11 all by myself and rebuilt New York," Giuliani. "I'm not afraid of Hillary."
"Yeah, well if she was here right now I'd...I'd...I'd call her a big fat hag right to her face,"Romney said.
Thompson raked Giuliani for having supported federal funding of abortion, voting for the reelection of Democrat Mario Cuomo for governor in 1994, backing gun control and making New York a sanctuary city for immigrants. "He sides with Hillary Clinton on each of those issues," Thompson said.
"Do not," Giuliani responded.
"Do too," Romney added. "I bet you want to go steady with her."
Giuliani then jumped on Thompson, attacking his record in the Senate of opposing GOP-sponsored legislation to limit costly lawsuits. "Fred was the single biggest obstacle to tort reform in the United States Senate," he said. "He stood with democrats over and over again. Hillary's a democrat you know."
"What's a tort?" asked Thomapson.
One of the most personal attacks came when senator John McCain joined the fray, taking umbrage at Romney's recent statement that he speaks for the "Republican wing" of the Republican Party. "Governor Romney, you've been spending the last year trying to fool people about your record," McCain said. "I don't want you to start fooling them about mine. I stand on my record. I stand on my record of a conservative. Plus I once tried to run Hillary over."
Former Arkansas governor Mike Huckabee, who has been crowding his way into the top tier of the race, stood by throughout the early exchanges, then chided the others for attacking one another, saying, "Hey. I'm running for president too. Can somebody accuse me of liking Hillary?"
Prodded by Fox News's Chris Wallace, the Republican candidates unloaded on Clinton, describing her as unfit to be commander in chief, determined to create a government-run health system and a big-spending tax hiker, and an ugly headed poopy face. "I'm supposed to ask you guys questions about health care, the economy and the war and stuff people care about, but let's just forget that and call Hillary names," Wallace said.
"Fine with me," Romney replied. "I have so many positions I can't keep them straight anyway."
"Can we at least talk about 9/11," Giuliani asked.
"I'm a war hero," McCain said.
"Is there a restroom nearby?" Thompson wanted to know.
Wallace turned to Giuliani and compared him to Clinton, Giuliani said simply: "You've got to be kidding. You have got to be kidding." He quoted Clinton as saying: "I have a million ideas; America cannot afford them all," and then, with a sneer, said: "No kidding, Hillary -- America can't afford you."
"Oh no he di nit" the audience responded.
While the candidates echoed Bush's positions on several issues, they distinguished themselves from him as more hawkish on foreign policy, declaring that they would take a harder line against Russia and Iran. "All Bush could manage was to start two wars," Giuliani said. "If elected I'll be at war with Iran and North Korea before inauguration day.
"Yeah, well I'll be at war with Iran, North Korea and Mexico before the votes are counted," Romney countered.
"Gentlemen. Can we just get back to calling Hillary names," Fox news correspondent Wallace asked.
"Aren't we already at war with Iran," Thompson wanted to know.
"That's Iraq, senator. Try to keep up," Wallace answered.
Tancredo, Hunter and Paul played smaller roles. Tancredo accused House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Woman too.) of interfering in foreign policy and provoking Turkey at a sensitive moment by pushing a resolution on Armenian genocide. "Nancy Pelosi is not a very good speaker of the House, and she is an even lousier secretary of state," he said.
"Wait. I thought we were talking about Hillary," said Romney.
"They all look alike to me," Giuliani said.
"Nancy Pelosi" Isn't that Reagan's wife? asked Thompson.
Hunter answered a question about Social Security with a lecture on trade policy, prompting an incredulous Hume to ask: "Do you really think we can solve the Social Security and Medicare entitlement programs with trade policy?"
"No, but I'm sure Hillary does," Hunter responded.
Paul spoke passionately against the war in Iraq. But he also accused his Republican rivals of being for big government. "Our big-government conservatives, they're part of the neo-conservative movement. They've lost their traditions about traditional conservatism and the Constitution."
"I know you are, but what am I?" asked Romney.
"I hear Hillary likes the Constitution too." Giuliani said.
"Who's Hillary?" Thompson asked. By then most of the audience had left to watch Alan Keyes debate the Zorgons in the park across the street.
Thursday, September 27, 2007
Craig's Out Of The Closet. The Water Closet
Full disclosure: On more than one occasion this blog has been pretty easy to write--even after the Stoli comes out of the freezer. In fact, truth be told, sometimes it pretty much writes itself. Which is why we weren't too upset when Wide Stance Larry decided to give up his seat in the Senate and devote himself full time to changing the regulations that govern the width of bathroom stalls so the heartbreak experienced by citizens with...er...positional issues can be addressed. They're the last minority it is legal to discriminate against you know. Anyway, no great loss thinks us, there's plenty of other fish in the sea, or republicans in the closet as the case may be.
Oh, but look: He's baaaack!
A Minnesota judge will not rule until the end of next week on a petition by senator Larry E. Craig to set aside his guilty plea for disorderly conduct. "The courts are backed up," said Ken Bergstrom, a spokesman for the Hennepin County District Court. "It will be a week or so before things are regular again.
"Disorderly conduct." So that what the kids are calling it these days.
“Today was a major step in the legal effort to clear my name,” Craig said. “The court has not issued a ruling on my motion to withdraw my guilty plea." When asked how the court doing nothing was a "major step," Craig replied "They're stalling because they know I'm innocent."
To reporters waiting outside his “hideaway” office in the Senate marked only with a sign that read "Men," Craig said only, “In loo of the judge's decision we’ve issued a statement; that should be adequate for tonight.” Craig ignored a shouted question about whether he would still be a senator after Sunday. "Rumors of the senator's resignation are just so much gas," said a spokesperson from Craig's office. "You'll get the full poop on the senator's plans after the judge rules."
Minority Leader Mitch McConnell, R-Ky Jelly, had supported Craig’s announced resignation as the difficult but correct decision. "I understand there's been some movement in Larry's position," McConnell said. "But I'm still confident things will come out all right in the end."
Craig pleaded guilty last month to a misdemeanor disorderly conduct charge after an undercover police officer in a restroom at the Minneapolis-St. Paul International Airport interpreted some hand and foot motions as an invitation for sex. "So I'm a friendly guy," Craig said. "Is that a good reason to flush my entire career away?"
Craig later said he was not trying to send signals in that restroom, and described himself as choosing to plead guilty to make the accusation go away without attracting attention in his home state. "It's all a big misunderstanding," said Craig. "And besides, it's not like I did something that caused the airport to be evacuated or anything.
Oh, but look: He's baaaack!
A Minnesota judge will not rule until the end of next week on a petition by senator Larry E. Craig to set aside his guilty plea for disorderly conduct. "The courts are backed up," said Ken Bergstrom, a spokesman for the Hennepin County District Court. "It will be a week or so before things are regular again.
"Disorderly conduct." So that what the kids are calling it these days.
“Today was a major step in the legal effort to clear my name,” Craig said. “The court has not issued a ruling on my motion to withdraw my guilty plea." When asked how the court doing nothing was a "major step," Craig replied "They're stalling because they know I'm innocent."
To reporters waiting outside his “hideaway” office in the Senate marked only with a sign that read "Men," Craig said only, “In loo of the judge's decision we’ve issued a statement; that should be adequate for tonight.” Craig ignored a shouted question about whether he would still be a senator after Sunday. "Rumors of the senator's resignation are just so much gas," said a spokesperson from Craig's office. "You'll get the full poop on the senator's plans after the judge rules."
Minority Leader Mitch McConnell, R-Ky Jelly, had supported Craig’s announced resignation as the difficult but correct decision. "I understand there's been some movement in Larry's position," McConnell said. "But I'm still confident things will come out all right in the end."
Craig pleaded guilty last month to a misdemeanor disorderly conduct charge after an undercover police officer in a restroom at the Minneapolis-St. Paul International Airport interpreted some hand and foot motions as an invitation for sex. "So I'm a friendly guy," Craig said. "Is that a good reason to flush my entire career away?"
Craig later said he was not trying to send signals in that restroom, and described himself as choosing to plead guilty to make the accusation go away without attracting attention in his home state. "It's all a big misunderstanding," said Craig. "And besides, it's not like I did something that caused the airport to be evacuated or anything.
Wednesday, September 12, 2007
We're Sorry. The NewsConference Will Have To Be Posponed Until After Mr. Thompson's Nap
OK, here's something that struck us as a little odd about one of the Bus Load of Screaming Whackos (tm) otherwise known as the republican argument for government sponsored mental health testing and free psycho-pharmaceuticals...er...candidates for president.
Republican presidential contender Fred Thompson, who has based his campaign on not doing much and appealing to conservative voters who are mostly listening to the voices in their heads--or Fox News, said he isn't a regular churchgoer and doesn't plan to speak about his religion on the stump. "Actually I don't want to talk about much of anything," Thompson said. "Just pretend I'm saying what you want to hear."
Excuse us, but isn't that the only thing republicans are supposed to talk about? For example, if gay marriage were outlawed we'd be winning in Iraq, and Osama bin Laden is for stem cell research. It's been in all the papers.
"Actually religious people give me the creeps," Thompson said. "Why don't y'all just keep telling me why you want me for president like you did before?"
Thompson, in his first campaign stop in South Carolina, told a crowd of about 500 Republicans yesterday that he gained his values from "sitting around the kitchen table with his parents and "the good Church of Christ. That ole' bottle a moonshine daddy kept in the cupboard didn't hurt none either.''
Thompson said he usually attends church when he gets lost on the way to the golf course and isn't a member of any church in the Washington area. "I'm all for that holy roller stuff though if that's what it take to get folks to vote for me."
"As long as he was acclimated in some kind of church, involved in the church, that's very important,'' said Jamie Darnell, 27, of Greenville.
Yeah, but Jamie, he just said he wasn't.
"Umm...well...I really don't do half the things I say either."
Asked by reporters later to clarify his stance on religion, Thompson said: ``Me getting up and talking about what a wonderful person I am and that sort of thing, I'm not comfortable with that, and I don't think it does me any good. People will make up their own mind about that, and that's the way I like it.''
Asked what that answer had to do with his stance on religion, Thompson admitted he didn't know but said "that's all you're getting because it's time for my nap. Oh, and Romney sucks."
Thompson, 65, who officially joined the race for the Republican presidential nomination last week because his show went into reruns and no one had offered him a movie role. He spoke at length about the need for a "stronger and more unified program of senior discounts'' to withstand a global battle against young'uns getting all the good stuff off the buffet. Oh, and I'll win the war on terra too. Where's the restroom?"
So far, Thompson hasn't talked in detail about what U.S. foreign policy would look like should he be elected. "Foreign policy is about them folks that live over there," he told reporters, gesturing off in a vague direction. "They don't even have the American tee vee."
The August 1 collapse of a Minneapolis bridge that killed 13 people -- the worst U.S. bridge failure in 25 years --"went down because things aren't being paid attention to at home,'' said Cindy Holden, 57, a nurse who asked the question. In response, Thompson launched into an almost 10-minute answer focused on why it was necessary to overthrow Saddam Hussein. He didn't mention infrastructure.
"Works for me," Holden said.
Republican presidential contender Fred Thompson, who has based his campaign on not doing much and appealing to conservative voters who are mostly listening to the voices in their heads--or Fox News, said he isn't a regular churchgoer and doesn't plan to speak about his religion on the stump. "Actually I don't want to talk about much of anything," Thompson said. "Just pretend I'm saying what you want to hear."
Excuse us, but isn't that the only thing republicans are supposed to talk about? For example, if gay marriage were outlawed we'd be winning in Iraq, and Osama bin Laden is for stem cell research. It's been in all the papers.
"Actually religious people give me the creeps," Thompson said. "Why don't y'all just keep telling me why you want me for president like you did before?"
Thompson, in his first campaign stop in South Carolina, told a crowd of about 500 Republicans yesterday that he gained his values from "sitting around the kitchen table with his parents and "the good Church of Christ. That ole' bottle a moonshine daddy kept in the cupboard didn't hurt none either.''
Thompson said he usually attends church when he gets lost on the way to the golf course and isn't a member of any church in the Washington area. "I'm all for that holy roller stuff though if that's what it take to get folks to vote for me."
"As long as he was acclimated in some kind of church, involved in the church, that's very important,'' said Jamie Darnell, 27, of Greenville.
Yeah, but Jamie, he just said he wasn't.
"Umm...well...I really don't do half the things I say either."
Asked by reporters later to clarify his stance on religion, Thompson said: ``Me getting up and talking about what a wonderful person I am and that sort of thing, I'm not comfortable with that, and I don't think it does me any good. People will make up their own mind about that, and that's the way I like it.''
Asked what that answer had to do with his stance on religion, Thompson admitted he didn't know but said "that's all you're getting because it's time for my nap. Oh, and Romney sucks."
Thompson, 65, who officially joined the race for the Republican presidential nomination last week because his show went into reruns and no one had offered him a movie role. He spoke at length about the need for a "stronger and more unified program of senior discounts'' to withstand a global battle against young'uns getting all the good stuff off the buffet. Oh, and I'll win the war on terra too. Where's the restroom?"
So far, Thompson hasn't talked in detail about what U.S. foreign policy would look like should he be elected. "Foreign policy is about them folks that live over there," he told reporters, gesturing off in a vague direction. "They don't even have the American tee vee."
The August 1 collapse of a Minneapolis bridge that killed 13 people -- the worst U.S. bridge failure in 25 years --"went down because things aren't being paid attention to at home,'' said Cindy Holden, 57, a nurse who asked the question. In response, Thompson launched into an almost 10-minute answer focused on why it was necessary to overthrow Saddam Hussein. He didn't mention infrastructure.
"Works for me," Holden said.
Thursday, September 06, 2007
Hi, I'm Larry Craig And I Hear There's Some Grabbing Going On Around Here
This whole Senator Craig think really hasn't penetrated the Stoli fog much here in the marbled halls of IM Central. We mean, come on. Another republican in trouble for being the exact opposite of everything he says he stands for? Where's the news? These folks are walking projections, and the Em Ess Em is still surprised by that? Oh well, guess there were no missing white women that day. By the way, where is Paris?
So we're trying to go about our business here, scanning the internetz, looking in all the tubez for places interested in selling various prescription palliatives without the nuisance of an actual prescription when we run across this headline: Craig supporters call for boycott of Minneapolis airport.
Now, we're not exactly frequent fliers, but the last time we checked, unless you're the pilot, you don't get to choose what airport you fly into. But let's let them tell it:
Supporters of Sen. Larry Craig with the American Land Rights Association are calling for a boycott of the Minneapolis-Saint Paul Airport.
We're sorry, did you say the American Land Rights Association? Oh, so that's what they're calling it these days. Not as smooth on the tongue as "wide stance" but, it's your lifestyle choice, go ahead:
The Battle Ground (Washington) based association says airport police who arrested the senator in a men's room sex sting are responsible for weakening private property rights in the West.
At this point one of two things happen to rational people: Their heads explode, or they convince themselves they're reading The Onion.
We, on the other hand, foolishly wondered what land rights in Washington had to do with an old Queen from Idaho playing footsie with a cop in Minnesota so we made the mistake of reading on.
The American Land Rights Association, which has an office in Washington, D-C, advocates for the use of federal lands and against what it calls federal "land grabs."
Ah, "grabs." Now we're getting somewhere.
The association says the airport should apologize to Craig for what it calls "ambushing" the senator.
What? And then federal lands in Washington will be released to strip mall developers? Are strip mall developers gay too? OK, we're not getting this, but who cares? Look. Vicodin, no prescription necessary.
So we're trying to go about our business here, scanning the internetz, looking in all the tubez for places interested in selling various prescription palliatives without the nuisance of an actual prescription when we run across this headline: Craig supporters call for boycott of Minneapolis airport.
Now, we're not exactly frequent fliers, but the last time we checked, unless you're the pilot, you don't get to choose what airport you fly into. But let's let them tell it:
Supporters of Sen. Larry Craig with the American Land Rights Association are calling for a boycott of the Minneapolis-Saint Paul Airport.
We're sorry, did you say the American Land Rights Association? Oh, so that's what they're calling it these days. Not as smooth on the tongue as "wide stance" but, it's your lifestyle choice, go ahead:
The Battle Ground (Washington) based association says airport police who arrested the senator in a men's room sex sting are responsible for weakening private property rights in the West.
At this point one of two things happen to rational people: Their heads explode, or they convince themselves they're reading The Onion.
We, on the other hand, foolishly wondered what land rights in Washington had to do with an old Queen from Idaho playing footsie with a cop in Minnesota so we made the mistake of reading on.
The American Land Rights Association, which has an office in Washington, D-C, advocates for the use of federal lands and against what it calls federal "land grabs."
Ah, "grabs." Now we're getting somewhere.
The association says the airport should apologize to Craig for what it calls "ambushing" the senator.
What? And then federal lands in Washington will be released to strip mall developers? Are strip mall developers gay too? OK, we're not getting this, but who cares? Look. Vicodin, no prescription necessary.
Tuesday, August 07, 2007
Hi, I'm Mitt Romney. Unless You Want Me To Be Someone Else
Hey, guess what. Republicans are still running for president. We thought after all Bush had done for the party they were going to sit this one out and hope people stopped hating them by 2012. Well, that and most of the party would start getting out of jail around then.
But it looks like we were mistaken because they had a debate, or a prayer breakfast or whatever the other day and talked about how something something is like something more and something else isn't and anyway vote for me because I hate George Bush, but I voted for the war which isn't like, a contradiction at all unless you stop to think about it, and hey, I'm not in jail or under investigation. Plus I'm holier than the rest of this bunch.
Good thing Fred Thompson wasn't there. He could have put them all in their places because didn't he play a minister or something once? Maybe that was Newt Gingrich. No, he's the Scientologist. Wait, who's the Moron...er...Morman? That's Brownback, right? No, he's the Papist. Oh, it's Romney, the animal rights activist. OK, now that we got the important stuff figured out, let's see what Romney's positions are.
The former Massachusetts governor was asked to grade himself as a conservative on a scale of one to 10 if Reagan were a 10. "Probably a 10 as well," Romney said. "Wait. Is being like Reagan an good thing? If not then I'm a one. A minus one even."
Romney ran as a moderate in his failed 1994 bid to unseat Sen. Edward M. Kennedy and in his winning gubernatorial campaign eight years later. In a 1994 debate with Kennedy, Romney defended a woman's right to abortion and sought to distance himself from Reagan. "Was that not a good thing?" Romney asked. Because if it wasn't I probably don't believe that today." Romney had an aide bring out his policy notebooks and after a few moments of searching announced he was planning on adopting several "snowflake children" if elected.
My positions don't talk about the things you suggest they talk about; this isn't a political issue," Romney said at the debate. When asked to explain what he meant by that, Romney referred reporters to his director of communication Mushmouth.
But it looks like we were mistaken because they had a debate, or a prayer breakfast or whatever the other day and talked about how something something is like something more and something else isn't and anyway vote for me because I hate George Bush, but I voted for the war which isn't like, a contradiction at all unless you stop to think about it, and hey, I'm not in jail or under investigation. Plus I'm holier than the rest of this bunch.
Good thing Fred Thompson wasn't there. He could have put them all in their places because didn't he play a minister or something once? Maybe that was Newt Gingrich. No, he's the Scientologist. Wait, who's the Moron...er...Morman? That's Brownback, right? No, he's the Papist. Oh, it's Romney, the animal rights activist. OK, now that we got the important stuff figured out, let's see what Romney's positions are.
The former Massachusetts governor was asked to grade himself as a conservative on a scale of one to 10 if Reagan were a 10. "Probably a 10 as well," Romney said. "Wait. Is being like Reagan an good thing? If not then I'm a one. A minus one even."
Romney ran as a moderate in his failed 1994 bid to unseat Sen. Edward M. Kennedy and in his winning gubernatorial campaign eight years later. In a 1994 debate with Kennedy, Romney defended a woman's right to abortion and sought to distance himself from Reagan. "Was that not a good thing?" Romney asked. Because if it wasn't I probably don't believe that today." Romney had an aide bring out his policy notebooks and after a few moments of searching announced he was planning on adopting several "snowflake children" if elected.
My positions don't talk about the things you suggest they talk about; this isn't a political issue," Romney said at the debate. When asked to explain what he meant by that, Romney referred reporters to his director of communication Mushmouth.
Wednesday, July 25, 2007
Bush. George Bush? That Guy's Still President?
We're coming to you today from the balcony overlooking the Pit of Rising Despair just off of the north portico here at the marbled halls of IM Central. Occasionally we like to wander out here in the evenings with our favorite greyhound...no not that greyhound, that greyhound, well, actually both greyhounds are our favorites, just in different ways, right Stoli? C'mere boy. Good dog. Now, go get daddy some more ice.
Where were we. Oh, yeah, the building chorus of teeth gnashing, hair pulling and chest beating rising up from the Pit as more and more republicans realize that when they go for a job interview after they aren't reelected and face that inevitable question: What did you do in your previous position? Their answer is going to have to be: Supported an idiot president who got the country into a needless war. And then lost it. The war we mean.
Senate Republicans are growing increasingly nervous defending the clusterf...er...war in Iraq. More than a year before the 2008 elections, it is a political role reversal that bodes ill for the few republicans who remain unindicted for money laundering activity, or criminal sexual conduct. "Those of us who aren't going to jail are beginning to get concerned about being reelected," said Senator Mitch McConnell of Kentucky who is not currently under investigation for anything.
Yet as the party leader, McConnell is more circumspect than many Republicans in his characterization of the administration's war strategy. Asked whether he agreed that the conflict had been badly mismanaged McConnell declined to respond verbally, but spelled out "The president's insane" using American sign language.
"The strategy we had before was not the right strategy,"Senator Christopher Bond, told reporters at midweek. When asked if he was competing with the president for the number of times he could state the completely obvious as if it were a new and startling revelation, Bond responded that he was "distanced" from the current administration. "I'm a straight talking Maverick," he said. "And I'll tell you exactly what I think. As soon as I get it from Cheney's office."
"Today's mission is focused on reelection," said senator Jon Kyl. "Erm...al-Qaida. I mean al-Qaida," reflecting what other senators who must run in November say privately.
One Republican senator, speaking on condition of anonymity, said the shift in talk of a military objective was a prelude to a change to a strategy that would pull U.S. troops back from a civil war between Sunni and Shiites. When asked why he requested anonymity, senator Lieberman replied that he didn't want to give the impression that he was no longer supporting president Bush. "I have my own nickname," he added.
But focusing attention on al-Qaida raises familiar questions: Were terrorists present in Iraq before the 2003 invasion. "Well, of course not," said senator Kyl. "What are you? One of those people who only watches Fox News or something?"
According to several officials, senator George Voinovich, and McCain engaged in a brief, impromptu debate touching on that point recently at a private meeting of the rank and file."Well, it wasn't much of a debate really," said one observer who asked not to be identified. "Everybody pretty much shut up and went back to their seats when Cheney came in."
Only four of 49 Republican senators defected in last week's showdown on deadlines for troop withdrawal. The group did not include senators John Warner of Virginia, Richard Lugar of Indiana, Pete Domenici of New Mexico and other senior lawmakers who are seeking a change in course. "Oh, you mean we have to vote on this stuff too?" asked Domenici. "I'm going to have to get back to you on that part."
"In May, Republicans were dismissing even tough questions about the escalation. Now, they're falling all over themselves to distance themselves from the president," said senator John Kerry. "Well, that's not entirely true," responded senator Lugar. "We're republicans. We don't 'fall all over ourselves.' We have our staff do that while we are driven away in the limo."
Where were we. Oh, yeah, the building chorus of teeth gnashing, hair pulling and chest beating rising up from the Pit as more and more republicans realize that when they go for a job interview after they aren't reelected and face that inevitable question: What did you do in your previous position? Their answer is going to have to be: Supported an idiot president who got the country into a needless war. And then lost it. The war we mean.
Senate Republicans are growing increasingly nervous defending the clusterf...er...war in Iraq. More than a year before the 2008 elections, it is a political role reversal that bodes ill for the few republicans who remain unindicted for money laundering activity, or criminal sexual conduct. "Those of us who aren't going to jail are beginning to get concerned about being reelected," said Senator Mitch McConnell of Kentucky who is not currently under investigation for anything.
Yet as the party leader, McConnell is more circumspect than many Republicans in his characterization of the administration's war strategy. Asked whether he agreed that the conflict had been badly mismanaged McConnell declined to respond verbally, but spelled out "The president's insane" using American sign language.
"The strategy we had before was not the right strategy,"Senator Christopher Bond, told reporters at midweek. When asked if he was competing with the president for the number of times he could state the completely obvious as if it were a new and startling revelation, Bond responded that he was "distanced" from the current administration. "I'm a straight talking Maverick," he said. "And I'll tell you exactly what I think. As soon as I get it from Cheney's office."
"Today's mission is focused on reelection," said senator Jon Kyl. "Erm...al-Qaida. I mean al-Qaida," reflecting what other senators who must run in November say privately.
One Republican senator, speaking on condition of anonymity, said the shift in talk of a military objective was a prelude to a change to a strategy that would pull U.S. troops back from a civil war between Sunni and Shiites. When asked why he requested anonymity, senator Lieberman replied that he didn't want to give the impression that he was no longer supporting president Bush. "I have my own nickname," he added.
But focusing attention on al-Qaida raises familiar questions: Were terrorists present in Iraq before the 2003 invasion. "Well, of course not," said senator Kyl. "What are you? One of those people who only watches Fox News or something?"
According to several officials, senator George Voinovich, and McCain engaged in a brief, impromptu debate touching on that point recently at a private meeting of the rank and file."Well, it wasn't much of a debate really," said one observer who asked not to be identified. "Everybody pretty much shut up and went back to their seats when Cheney came in."
Only four of 49 Republican senators defected in last week's showdown on deadlines for troop withdrawal. The group did not include senators John Warner of Virginia, Richard Lugar of Indiana, Pete Domenici of New Mexico and other senior lawmakers who are seeking a change in course. "Oh, you mean we have to vote on this stuff too?" asked Domenici. "I'm going to have to get back to you on that part."
"In May, Republicans were dismissing even tough questions about the escalation. Now, they're falling all over themselves to distance themselves from the president," said senator John Kerry. "Well, that's not entirely true," responded senator Lugar. "We're republicans. We don't 'fall all over ourselves.' We have our staff do that while we are driven away in the limo."
Wednesday, February 21, 2007
And Tom DeLay Works For CTU
Boy, for being stupid, the republicans are really smart. Or maybe they care more about money, than national security. Or maybe they care so much about national security that they're willing to put the reputation of the party at risk to con the terrorists into giving their money away.
Or maybe we're just confused.
Abdul Tawala Ibn Ali Alishtari, 53, of Ardsley, N.Y., pleaded not guilty in U.S. District Court in Manhattan to an indictment accusing him of terrorism financing, material support of terrorism and other charges. Alishtari gave $15,500 to the National Republican Campaign Committee between 2002 and 2004, according to Federal Election Commission records. That amount includes $13,000 in 2003, a year when he claims to have been named NRCC New York State Businessman of the Year.
"Hey, just because you're a terrorists doesn't mean you can't be a good businessman," said a spokesperson for the NRCC. "How do you think bin Laden got all his money, the lotto? I don't think so."
Alishtari also claims to be a lifetime member of the National Republican Senate Committee's Inner Circle, which the NRCC describes as "an impressive cross-section of American society – community leaders, business executives, entrepreneurs, retirees, and sports and entertainment celebrities, terrorists and terrorist sympathizers – all of whom have a lot of money."
But... Is that THE WHOLE STORY???
The NRCC "Businessperson of the Year" fund raising campaign, which gave such "awards" to at least 1,900 GOP donors, has been derided as a telemarketing scam by political watchdogs.
A scam? A scam THAT CATCHES TERRORISTS!!!!1! And here's the beauty part. NRCC gets to keep the money. Oh, the irony!! Using the ill gotten gains of the islamocommiefascistninjashadowwarriors to support the party of God, America, Family, Straights, Womb babies, brain dead women and G.W. Bush. Not available in all areas, some restrictions apply, void where prohibited.
The online list also claims Alishtari was appointed to the president's "USNRCC White House Business Advisory Group." Except, THERE IS NO BUSINESS ADVISORY GROUP you terrorist scum! Plus NRCC gets to keep the money.
The indictment said Alishtari tried to support terrorists between June and December by accepting an unspecified amount of money to transfer $152,000 that he believed was being sent to Pakistan and Afghanistan to support an Afghanistan terrorist training camp. "We're only sorry we didn't get all his money," said the NRCC spokesperson. Maybe with a few more bucks to spend we'd have held on to the Senate. Did I mention we get to keep the money?"
When asked about regular Americans who had also been caught up in the republican scam the spokesperson responded that NRCC would keep their money as well, "because freedom isn't free."
Or maybe we're just confused.
Abdul Tawala Ibn Ali Alishtari, 53, of Ardsley, N.Y., pleaded not guilty in U.S. District Court in Manhattan to an indictment accusing him of terrorism financing, material support of terrorism and other charges. Alishtari gave $15,500 to the National Republican Campaign Committee between 2002 and 2004, according to Federal Election Commission records. That amount includes $13,000 in 2003, a year when he claims to have been named NRCC New York State Businessman of the Year.
"Hey, just because you're a terrorists doesn't mean you can't be a good businessman," said a spokesperson for the NRCC. "How do you think bin Laden got all his money, the lotto? I don't think so."
Alishtari also claims to be a lifetime member of the National Republican Senate Committee's Inner Circle, which the NRCC describes as "an impressive cross-section of American society – community leaders, business executives, entrepreneurs, retirees, and sports and entertainment celebrities, terrorists and terrorist sympathizers – all of whom have a lot of money."
But...
The NRCC "Businessperson of the Year" fund raising campaign, which gave such "awards" to at least 1,900 GOP donors, has been derided as a telemarketing scam by political watchdogs.
A scam? A scam THAT CATCHES TERRORISTS!!!!1! And here's the beauty part. NRCC gets to keep the money. Oh, the irony!! Using the ill gotten gains of the islamocommiefascistninjashadowwarriors to support the party of God, America, Family, Straights, Womb babies, brain dead women and G.W. Bush. Not available in all areas, some restrictions apply, void where prohibited.
The online list also claims Alishtari was appointed to the president's "USNRCC White House Business Advisory Group." Except, THERE IS NO BUSINESS ADVISORY GROUP you terrorist scum! Plus NRCC gets to keep the money.
The indictment said Alishtari tried to support terrorists between June and December by accepting an unspecified amount of money to transfer $152,000 that he believed was being sent to Pakistan and Afghanistan to support an Afghanistan terrorist training camp. "We're only sorry we didn't get all his money," said the NRCC spokesperson. Maybe with a few more bucks to spend we'd have held on to the Senate. Did I mention we get to keep the money?"
When asked about regular Americans who had also been caught up in the republican scam the spokesperson responded that NRCC would keep their money as well, "because freedom isn't free."
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
’)
